Of late I’ve been trying to get my head around the discriminatory adoption laws the Human Rights Review Tribunal has recently bought to public awareness.

According to the 61-year-old legislation, the Adoption Act 1955, a child of a disabled parent can be put up for adoption without her consent.

The law also says that a same sex de-facto or civil union couple can’t adopt.

The first time I heard this, I almost didn’t believe it. A piece of legislation this out-dated and archaic surely should be amended or wiped out by now.

It is not enough to argue that no one would take a child away from the parent without their consent these days. The point is that they can make that judgement call if they want to and face no consequences under the law.

The decision as to whether a person or couple can take care of a child is their decision alone – nobody else has the right to have a say in that decision.

For many women with disabilities, going through a pregnancy is already an intensely difficult and emotional process. I can only imagine that going through that separation afterwards would be the most heartbreaking experience of a lifetime.

As a disabled woman myself, the possibility of this ever happening to me terrifies me completely.

I do know there are systems in place for a disabled parent to support them in whatever they need to take care of their child, which is great and we should invest more into these support systems. But again, this is only half of that security measure.

Even if this hasn’t happened in a fair while (I’m unaware of any cases where it has in New Zealand), it’s about time we take the step to solidify the rights of a parent over their child.

Two weeks ago the story broke about a mathematics professor who was denied residency in New Zealand because his stepson has autism.

I know I am a bit late to the party on this issue but at the end of the day this is part of an on-going struggle for acceptance from anyone in this country with any kind of difference.

According to the NZ Herald, Immigration New Zealand said, “We have declined your application for residence because Peter does not meet the health requirements to be granted residence in New Zealand and is not eligible for a medical waiver.”

You can’t get any more blatant than that. While it makes it even more shocking that Professor Dimitri Leemans is an academic, at the end of the day it shouldn’t really matter. Anyone who wants to make New Zealand their home and make a valuable contribution, which Mr Leemans was clearly doing, should be allowed to do so.

Mr Leeman’s response was absolutely on point: “It is already hard to have a disabled child but it is even harder when you live abroad because you don’t have the family to support you and then it is even harder when you see you are not welcome with your child in the country where you live.”

Being a migrant is difficult. It’s not done unless you genuinely feel the need to leave everything you know in hope for something better. But we did the opposite of make things better, which is heartbreaking.

According to the NZ Herald, parents are paying a record high amount for school donations, with costs for public secondary schools amounting to $3139 a year and $2047 for primary.

These costs include fees, extracurricular, clothing, necessities, travel and computers. And we all know those ‘donations’ are not at all optional.

All of those categories are necessary for a student’s learning, development and educational development.

It’s incredibly unfair for a student to miss out on a learning experience because their parents struggle to pay for it, not to mention the peer pressure that comes with that. This is how inequality perpetuates.

Of course these things cost money to acquire and someone needs to foot that bill, as unfortunate as that is. As much as education has no monetary value, we live in a system where everything is run by money, even the opportunities of innocent children in their futures.

But to put that burden on parents who are stuck between wanting the best for their children’s education and struggling to pay for the cost that comes with that.

If some families can’t even afford a decent breakfast, how can we expect all these other expenses to be easy to pay?

Ahmed Mohamed became famous for making a clock and getting in trouble for it.

The image of a confused young boy being handcuffed by police speaks volumes about the absurdity of the whole situation.

Literally all the kid wanted to do was impress his teacher, expecting praise from someone who knew him and how smart he was. Last I checked this wasn’t a crime. But it could be if you belong to a group that isn’t exactly the favourite of the day. His determination to follow his dream to keep inventing is a level of strength I wish I had. Anyone else simply would’ve given up for fear of constantly having to prove to the world that they should be treated as everyone else.

The international outpour of support is absolutely heart warming, but will his experience and his family’s response – they bought pizza for the media camped outside their house – do anything to shift the public perception about Muslims, particularly in the United States?

It could certainly improve, but as long as there’s a war to be fought, there will always be an enemy. ‘Othering’ of minority groups has always existed and as much as we hate it, it’s not going away anytime soon. Everyday people like Ahmed who are just trying to make it in the world like everyone else, will always pay a price for it.

July 2015 was the hottest month this planet has seen and this year is predicted to be the hottest on record. This is considered one of the many definitive proofs that the planet is getting warmer.

But why do we need extra proof? The science has been shoved in our faces for years.

The atoll nations in the Pacific such as Kiribati and Tuvalu are clearly sinking. Imagine if the land your ancestors are buried in ends up in the ocean and you had to leave. Last year Kiribati purchased 20km of land in Fiji to resettle their people for when their islands become inhabitable.

This is the reality of what we’re doing to our planet. This is a human rights issue as well as an environmental issue. No one should have to leave their homes because of forces beyond their control. Pacific nations aren’t even the ones causing global warning yet they’re the ones paying the ultimate price.

For decades the world leaders have been saying we need to do something about climate change. But what exactly are we going to do? How much do we have to destroy ourselves before we genuinely put human rights before industrial expansion?

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/08/23/what-more-proof-do-climate-deniers-need/feed/57Talking about Euthanasia as a woman in a wheelchairhttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/07/12/talking-about-euthanasia-as-a-woman-in-a-wheelchair/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/07/12/talking-about-euthanasia-as-a-woman-in-a-wheelchair/#commentsSat, 11 Jul 2015 20:56:55 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=61131

Euthanasia is a topic I have struggled with since I was a teenager. It’s not a topic I like to talk about as a woman in a wheelchair.

It’s taken me a long time to feel comfortable talking about it openly, so here it is.

To put it bluntly, a person should be able to end their suffering if they wish to. I have listened to the arguments against it and I see no rationality to them.

Is it a decision I would make myself? No. That’s mainly because my condition isn’t life threatening, my life is pretty sweet and my medical situation is stable.

I do however have those days where I open my eyes and the first thing I think to myself is ‘I don’t think I can do this anymore’. But somehow I still force myself up and do what I have to do – basically ‘fake it till you make it’. It’s probably super unhealthy psychologically, but it’s where my life is at right now.

Every time someone tells me to ‘keep being brave’, or to ‘soldier on’, I want to slap them. You can’t tell me how to react to my situation from your position of privilege.

I cannot imagine feeling that every single day, knowing your body will slowly shut down before switching off completely, all while being completely mentally aware, all while doctors tell you there’s nothing they can do.

It is not fair to expect someone to endure that pain. It is especially unfair to make that decision without at least empathising with the feeling I described above.

If you don’t know what it’s like to feel that pain, its not right to judge someone who wants to make that decision for themselves, nor can you punish doctors for listening to their patients.

On Tuesday I saw an article on NZ Herald’s Facebook page with the headline ‘People smuggling boat headed for NZ shores’. I never read Facebook comments but this time I did just to see if Australia’s inhumane treatment of ‘boat people’ may have sparked kiwis to react in the opposite way.

Big mistake.

The blatant lack of compassion far outweighed the few advocating for the world’s most vulnerable people.

Even though it’s hurtful to see, I’m not sure they’re to blame. Fear mongering about asylum seekers is rampant and damaging.

Firstly, they’re not ‘people smuggling boats’. These are refugees escaping persecution. Do you seriously think families, including children, leave everything behind, cram themselves into a rickety boat and cross the oceans knowing they have no guaranteed protection on the other side if their lives in were safe and secure? Would you?

To refuse to acknowledge that all humans are entitled to safety is the first step to dehumanisation, which eventually allows for people like Katie Hopkins to have space in newspapers to call them ‘cockroaches’. Lets not follow in those footsteps.

Unless you’re Maori, we all come from somewhere else and we or our ancestors left for a reason. It’s unfair to enjoy the ‘privilege’ of safety and opportunity while outright denying that for others.

Secondly, to say we can’t afford it is a cop out. If we spend our wealth in the right places, we can absolutely afford to double the refugee quota and take them in, just like we can afford to educate our future doctors and make sure our babies are growing up in warm, dry homes.

While John Key stands in front of the nation and says we’re allowed to own as many cats as we like, children are starving in the middle of the ocean. It’s in his hands to ‘get some guts’, do something about it and he simply won’t. In his usual fashion he dances around the question and simply gives no answer.

There has been a lot of publicity about able-bodied motorists stealing disability car parks and only a little bit about those who are entitled to these spaces yet are accused of abusing the right to it.

A woman in Masterton was accused of ‘not looking disabled’ when she parked in a disability parking spot and showed her permit.

To be fair, the look of the permits has changed. The bright orange permit has been replaced with a more subtle green and white card. Since this change is fairly recent both cards can still be used and not many people know about change. This is causing more questioning to people who have been issued the new card.

There hasn’t been much publicity about the new cards, which is probably the reason for the confusion – I didn’t even know about the change until my old one expired and I got my new permit in the mail.

However, this issue didn’t start with the issuing of the new permits. People with subtle or invisible disabilities have always been accused of ‘not looking disabled enough’ to park there. It’s not really anybody else’s business what somebody looks like. If a person went through the rigmarole of applying for a permit, they obviously need it.

Nobody deserves to be doubted about such a personal and private matter. Nobody is under any obligation to answer your narrow-minded and self-serving questions.

There has been an increase in outrage over real abuses of the parking spaces, which is great. Energy would be better served cracking down on these scenarios rather than interrogating people who are already struggling and are just trying to go about their daily business.

New Zealanders believe we’re leading the world for human rights while study author Judy McGregor says its time to face modern day realities regarding this. Metiria Turei says this very sentiment is a myth.

It is hard to argue that we’re leaders in human rights when parents can barely afford GP visits because mortgage rates are through the roof. They then have to wait until the situation is out of control and visit the emergency room where it is free.

According to an article by stuff.co.nz, GP visits are a luxury item, which is shown by free clinics having to close off to new patients because of high demand. It also says one patient owed $890.

We’ve all delayed seeing the doctor for one reason or another. But any country where you have to pay to receive basic healthcare, and where you have to delay seeking healthcare is not exactly what I would call a human rights leader.

No family should have to compromise healthcare to keep a roof over their heads. GPs are currently working based on a business model, which we should all be questioning.

For someone to be in healthcare debt, you’re essentially punishing him or her for being sick. Being in debt due to healthcare costs is probably one of the most barbaric aspects of our society. It’s not a luxury, as if a person accumulated a massive debt from a shopping spree. Healthcare is a necessity.

This government simply cant expect us to afford soaring mortgage rates and basic life necessities. What’s left after that?

This time it is property developer Gerard Peters and his Lamborghini at Lynn Mall who was apparently in a rush while he was being asked for 30 minutes over the loudspeaker to move his vehicle.

It really does not matter how much money a person has or what kind of car they drive – nobody has the right to take something that is explicitly for someone else. But it is true that huge material ownership can sometimes inflict a warped sense of entitlement onto a person.

Everybody is accountable to the same rules. I don’t care what kind of car you drive, or how long you’re going to be, or that you have a disabled brother (which actually does not help your case at all) – you have no right to inhibit further hardship onto a person who already has it pretty tough.

This is what happens when your decisions are based on individualistic values rather than communal and societal harmony. Imagine how different our world would be if those with money used it to make the world a better place. Of course there are people who do, but there are also those who don’t.

It may seem like such a small thing to get so deep and emotional about, but doing something as seemingly insignificant as that is where it starts.

This week has been particularly brutal when it comes to the government’s decisions regarding our country’s most vulnerable.

First they decided they weren’t going to feed hungry school children, then the report was released saying 11,000 children with disabilities and their families are being stopped from receiving allowances that they are perfectly entitled to.

I find it really difficult to understand how we can spend $36 million on the America’s Cup and send troops to fight in someone else’s complicated war while New Zealand’s most vulnerable children have little access to the quality of life that we all deserve.

According to the report by Child Action Poverty Group, launched on Thursday, criteria for eligibility for this allowance has been tightened and parents of children with disabilities aren’t informed that they are entitled to this allowance.

The blatant lack of empathy for what such families go through is incredible and I find it unbelievable that out of all the bludgers out there, this is a group the government has decided to crack down on. Never mind the corporate billionaires who evade shitloads of tax every year – let’s attack people who are simply just trying to make it day by day. Really?

The bottom line is that these parents are full-time caregivers. Most of the time, having a child with special needs makes it almost impossible to hold down a 40-hour working week.

It was mentioned in the Herald that one Wellington family lost their allowance when their son became old enough to tie his shoelaces. For anyone with a disability any amount of independence is a luxury. By cutting someone’s allowance for that reason, you are essentially punishing them for becoming more independent.

This is why so many people have to resort to exaggerating how bad their situation is just so that they can receive something – however little it may end up being – and you can’t blame them.

Amnesty International has just started a campaign called ‘Open to Syria’, with the aim of encouraging the New Zealand government to accept more refugees per year. John Key is adamant that this is a bad idea.

Accepting more refugees is a great idea especially if we’re going to involve ourselves in the most severe and complex conflicts of our time. It makes zero sense to send troops that will further damage the infrastructure of these areas and the livelihoods of the people there if we’re not even going to do anything to help the innocent people caught in the crossfire.

We are currently facing the worst humanitarian crisis since World War 2 and our quota hasn’t been increased since then. Before we criticize Australia for claiming to take their ‘fair share’ while turning the boats away, we should take a look at our own selves. We’re not even close to the number that other nations take on a per capita basis. We really have no legitimacy in saying that we simply can’t do it.

To say that we can’t afford to look after them is quite offensive and telling of our lack of understanding of our refugee community. Yes, they will need our help when they first arrive – this is obvious and mandatory. But as soon as they’re on their feet, the first thing they do is give back in any way they can. Some of the most generous and loving people you will ever meet arrived in New Zealand as refugees or are children of those who did.

I even hate talking about this situation from the viewpoint of ‘what’s in it for us?’ because it’s not about that. It’s about humanity and helping those who need our help. If the National government is harping on about how our economy is booming, then what is the problem? Why can’t we play our part on the world stage in a way that is so much more meaningful than dropping bombs?

Teina Pora just spent 22 years in jail for a crime he didn’t commit. I can’t even begin to imagine what it must be like to spend the peak of your years behind bars as an innocent person, while those who are clearly guilty roam free.

Even though Pora’s Foetal Alcohol Syndrome wasn’t mentioned until the Privy Council and the condition wasn’t as well known as it is now, it shows how the police can treat those with mental health conditions. These injustices and unfair treatments continue today even though we now have more of an understanding about mental health than we did before.

The authority complex of the police can put great amounts of pressure on anyone. Even I tighten up when I see a cop around even when I’m not even doing anything wrong. This isn’t meant to be the case in a healthy society.

In the USA, people with mental disabilities such as Down syndrome or autism have been beaten up and sometimes even killed because of misunderstandings and a lack of knowledge about their situations.

American police are obviously more trigger-happy than New Zealand police, but if things continue as they have been we can head in that general direction where they act before they think. Some mental illnesses are harder to spot than others, which make the need to be extra careful and understanding that much more necessary.

It could be far-fetched to compare New Zealand with USA but no matter the degrees of intensity the fact remains that police brutality is on the rise throughout the world. If we’re not careful we’ll continue to have innocent people, who are already marginalised and misunderstood in society being ill treated and humiliated for no reason whatsoever by the very people who are supposed to protect us.

John Key and the National Party are once again behaving like sheep in one of the most complex and dangerous conflicts of this time. It seems as if most people in New Zealand except the National party have negative feelings towards sending troops to Iraq, which is probably why there has been little democracy in this decision-making process.

Who is really surprised though? Since the National party came into Parliament they have done little else than make fools out of New Zealanders, and the fact that they got in for a third-term shows that they pretty much succeeded.

However, the public opinion about whether to involve ourselves in this way in Iraq seems to be unanimous. Nobody, except President Obama and his blind followers want another war on our hands. Key knows this, which is why he is not asking for a vote on it – he knows we will say no and I really don’t think he is willing to face that reality.

Nobody wants a repeat of last time and the fact that world leaders don’t see that the outcome will be disastrous scares me. ISIS may or may not be affected when troops are deployed, but civilians will definitely be stuck in the crossfire. With ISIS on one side and Western troops on the other, where exactly are they supposed to go?

As Green MP Russell Norman said in parliament this week, there are other options if only they are willing to see it. Humanitarian aid and diplomatic solutions such as putting pressure on Saudi Arabia, the biggest supplier to ISIS are just a couple of examples.

From a New Zealand point of view however, we have issues closer to home that this government has been completely silent about. Gross human rights violations are happening in West Papua. Hundreds of refugees are living on rickety boats off the coast of Australia or in detention centres in Papua New Guinea because Australia apparently has no space (seriously though, that place is massive). When did anybody hear Key or anyone in the National party speak out about it and ‘refuse to do nothing’? They haven’t because nothing is exactly what they’re doing. Then obviously there are our own domestic issues.

Of course I’m not saying that one human rights violation is more important to tackle than the other. But I do think it’s interesting that the only case of it that our Prime Minister is willing to do anything about, however disastrous it may be, is the one that is the hot topic at the White House right now.
John Key and the National Party are once again behaving like sheep in one of the most complex and dangerous conflicts of this time. It seems as if most people in New Zealand except the National party have negative feelings towards sending troops to Iraq, which is probably why there has been little democracy in this decision-making process.

Who is really surprised though? Since the National party came into Parliament they have done little else than make fools out of New Zealanders, and the fact that they got in for a third-term shows that they pretty much succeeded.

However, the public opinion about whether to involve ourselves in this way in Iraq seems to be unanimous. Nobody, except President Obama and his blind followers want another war on our hands. Key knows this, which is why he is not asking for a vote on it – he knows we will say no and I really don’t think he is willing to face that reality.

Nobody wants a repeat of last time and the fact that world leaders don’t see that the outcome will be disastrous scares me. ISIS may or may not be affected when troops are deployed, but civilians will definitely be stuck in the crossfire. With ISIS on one side and Western troops on the other, where exactly are they supposed to go?

As Green MP Russell Norman said in parliament this week, there are other options if only they are willing to see it. Humanitarian aid and diplomatic solutions such as putting pressure on Saudi Arabia, the biggest supplier to ISIS are just a couple of examples.

From a New Zealand point of view however, we have issues closer to home that this government has been completely silent about. Gross human rights violations are happening in West Papua. Hundreds of refugees are living on rickety boats off the coast of Australia or in detention centres in Papua New Guinea because Australia apparently has no space (seriously though, that place is massive). When did anybody hear Key or anyone in the National party speak out about it and ‘refuse to do nothing’? They haven’t because nothing is exactly what they’re doing. Then obviously there are our own domestic issues.

Of course I’m not saying that one human rights violation is more important to tackle than the other. But I do think it’s interesting that the only case of it that our Prime Minister is willing to do anything about, however disastrous it may be, is the one that is the hot topic at the White House right now.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/03/01/a-nz-muslim-view-on-re-invading-iraq/feed/10‘Crip Up’ as bad as blackfacehttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/02/23/crip-up-as-bad-as-blackface/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2015/02/23/crip-up-as-bad-as-blackface/#commentsSun, 22 Feb 2015 19:36:19 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=56072
It’s no secret that Hollywood and the film industry have a history and culture of whitewashing, romanticising and glamorising historical events. The lack of diversity in films is still fairly obvious for anyone who is willing to see beyond the glitz and glamour associated with big Hollywood names.

The Theory of Everything is a film based on the life of Stephen Hawking, who we all know suffers from a motor neuron disease. The actor who portrays him in this film is Eddie Redmayne, who is able-bodied. This is only one example of actors who ‘crip up’ to play a role that the person with a disability is perfectly able of portraying and are then admired for their ability to play disabled. You can even go so far as to argue that its another form of blackface, minus the humiliation and obvious ridiculing. Think Forrest Gump as another example.

This reminded me of Maysoon Zayid, a comedian and actress with cerebral palsy. She tells a story about how she was turned down for a role about a woman with CP (which would have been perfect for her) because the director said she wouldn’t be able to do the stunts. Maysoon is a woman with CP – if she can’t do the stunts, neither can the character. Because of course, the issue never really is about what is realistic.

This problem is even worse for whitewashing historical events. In the film Exodus, Christian Bale portrays Moses. Whether you believe in this Biblical event or not, the fact remains that IF this events occurred, it was geographically impossible for Moses to be a white dude. This is just as bad as selling to people a blond haired, blue-eyed Jesus, so how far have we really come?

With the Academy Awards just around the corner and every single actor and actress nominee being white, it’s clear that the lack of diversity has got worse. I know people are going to cry ‘PC gone mad’ but the sad reality is that one of the most influential industries in the world is basically refusing to acknowledge that people and women of colour as well as differently abled can be just as talented as a white man.

Another tragedy has occurred this week. Deah Shaddy Barakat, his wife Yusor Mohammad Abu-Salha and her sister Razan Mohammad Abu-Salha were shot dead outside their homes, apparently over a parking space.

I know I’m not alone when I say my heart can’t handle any more blood shed. I sincerely hope that all the families of innocent victims of hate around the world find peace within their own hearts.

I find it weird how many people have to take to social media to remind the world that ‘all lives matter’. You don’t have to be a genius to see that the amount of media coverage any tragedy gets is dependent on certain factors – who committed the crime, what was the demographic of the victim/s, and what were the motives. A life taken is a life taken and these factors are important in every single case.

When the Charlie Hebdo shooting happened, the world was quick to react and start the conversation about freedom of speech. What about everyone’s freedom to dress as they please and go home without the fear of being harmed? What about the conversation about the rise of Islamophobia and hate crimes towards Muslims since 9/11? World leaders gathered in Paris almost instantly after the shooting. President Obama only spoke out about this shooting three long days later. The obvious double standard here is beyond scary.

Oh and by the way guys, just to clarify, I, a Muslim, condemn ISIS, you know, in case anyone was wondering. Their violations of these freedoms make me sick.

We all know this confrontation was not about a parking space. I’ve written time and time again about the frustration of having my disability parking spots stolen by the able-bodied. Am I about to kill the next person who does that? Hell no.

We only hear about particular stories if it fits the government’s or media’s agenda. Imam Zaid Shakir, a leading Islamic scholar based in the USA, puts it perfectly. “The sad fact is that the mainstream media that recently brought us “I am Charlie” has no interest in humanizing Muslims. The deceased were too full of life and positive energy to meet the stereotype of the evil, sneaky, not to be trusted Muslim.”

This hits the nail on the head. Seeing three beautiful, smiling Muslims who were so full of love that they dedicated their lives to helping people would just be too confusing for people to comprehend.

I’m not Charlie. I believe in free speech but not at the expense of 1.7 billion already marginalized people. I’d prefer to be Deah, Yusor and Razan, or at least aspire to be.

The issue of the alarming unemployment rate amongst the disabled community remains.

A report by Statistics New Zealand ‘Disability and the Labour Market’ shows that the unemployment rate of disabled people is double that of non-disabled people, and I don’t see much being done about it.

According to Nick Ruane, a person with a disability who has a Masters degree with honours in political science and a teaching qualification, the problem boils down to narrow-mindedness.

“I put my experience down to the tendency of employers to hire people who look, or seem like them. If you are a bit different it implies risk. It could raise questions for employers like: Is this person going to cost me money? Will this person create health and safety concerns in the workplace?”

There are systems put in place by the government to help fund any modifications the employee may need. The most likely response to that would be that employers simply don’t know about them, although it wouldn’t take very long to find out about them either. So what’s the next explanation?

The irrational fear of difference by employers means that our employment prospects, and therefore livelihoods and well-being are compromised. I find that very ironic in this current climate of beneficiary bashing. I’m not saying that all people with disabilities are receiving benefits but what exactly are the options for those who are willing and able to work but can’t because of such archaic stigmatisations? Nothing is more unfair than being judged for something that is beyond one’s control.

People with disabilities want to work, want to earn their own income and want to live their own lives. We would be able to do this if people in power stopped with the judgement and started looking at credentials rather than superficial qualities.

The amount of discrimination faced by those with invisible disabilities is an embarrassment.

A woman in Tauranga who had a mobility-parking permit was left a nasty note on her window by someone who thought she was being lazy. The note read “”We watched you to Fools Walk into the Shop you Should Be ashamed of your selfs using the Disability card. They are for People who Have genuine Problems with mobility not the lazy!” The victim then felt obliged to explain to The Warehouse staff why she needed a mobility-parking permit.

The symptoms and effects of one’s disability is a very private matter and to feel forced into disclosing information about that can be one of the most undignifying experiences a person can go through.

The conditions upon receiving a mobility-parking permit are:
– You are unable to walk and always require the use of a wheelchair
– Your ability to walk distances is severely restricted by a medical condition or disability. If, for example, you require the use of mobility aids, experience severe pain, or breathlessness
– You have a medical condition or disability that requires you to have physical contact or close supervision to safely get around and cannot be left unattended. For example, if you experience disorientation, confusion, or severe anxiety.
(CCS Disability Action)

Few people realise just how much work goes into acquiring one of these permits, and rightly so. The last thing we need is permits being handed out to people who genuinely do not need them. But that’s the point. This rarely happens, if at all, which means if someone has a permit there is a reason for it whether it is obvious or not.

It is not up to strangers and outsiders to pass judgment on a person of whom they know nothing about. The only time it is okay to become some kind of vigilante is if that person doesn’t have a permit. These are the real thieves. If such people really want to make the world a better, more inclusive place, they are your targets. These are the people you should be writing your notes to. They are so inconsiderate that I even give you permission to use lipstick on their windows if you have to. That shit never comes off.

The new president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists in the UK, Sir Simon Wessely has recently said, “If we treated people with diabetes the way we treat those with depression there would be an outcry”.

The fact that different disabilities are treated differently by the medical world is illogical in itself. Mental illness is never taken as seriously as physical disabilities and disability acquired by an accident holds more privilege than one acquired at birth.

When I was in the process of applying for funding for housing modifications from the Ministry of Health, the amount of time and paperwork it took was unnecessary added stress to what I was already going through. If I however were wheelchair-bound from a car accident for example, ACC would have provided the funding immediately and there would be no limit to the amount they would give. Myself on the other hand had a capped amount that I was eligible to and each application took at least a year. By the time the year passes, I’m almost at the point of desperation.

To say that one type of disability is entitled to more privileges than another is an out-dated and unfair practice. While the kind of support one will require will differ from case to case, the type of disability one has and the way in which it was acquired should be irrelevant when it comes to accessing support.

The mental stress is still there regardless of how or what the individual situation is and each person is entitled to live their life the way they choose to with the least hindrances as possible. Whether the disability is mental or physical, stigmatisations and inconsistencies in treatment or occupational therapy does nothing but add unnecessary stress on the person who requires it and their family.

Many districts across the country have been changing the mobility parking spots to the vivid blue colour scheme as opposed to the simple yellow sign. This has been done as an attempt to make the designated spots more visible to able-bodied drivers who would argue that they ‘never saw the sign’.

However in the Far North it has done little to decrease or stop these parking abuses from happening. This is a clear sign that disability-parking violations actually have little to do with visibility and everything to do with lack of awareness of disability issues.

Until the general public understand just how important these designated parking spaces are for people with disabilities, able-bodied motorists will continue to park in them at the expense of those who genuinely need these spaces.

From the outside a simple parking space may seem like a non-issue but this is the exact sentiment that holds that any form of activism towards any marginalised group. People who shrug off legitimate complaints and grievances as trivial and melodramatic simply fail in trying to empathise with a particular community that is not theirs.

Without these parking spaces, motorists and passengers with disabilities are unable to fulfil the daily jobs that every single one of us has. There is a reason why mobility parking spaces are wider and close to a curb that goes on to the footpath. No one else needs these two crucial differences except people with disabilities, both temporary and permanent. No one else knows the dangers of taking a wheelchair across the car park where reversing motorists can’t see you.

This is no trivial matter and while the vivid blue colour scheme is most definitely an important step in the right direction, this issue will not be solved until the underlying problem of lack of awareness is tackled. This is what the bulk of the attention about mobility parking abuses needs to be focused on.

This week our lovely Prime Minister has showed us how little he knows about the history of the country he is supposed to be running. Apparently “New Zealand was settled peacefully”. Was it really? Because I know plenty of people who would disagree.

In saying this however, I also know people who would agree with this statement and Key’s remark highlighted how little some Kiwis know about Maori-Pakeha race relations from the 19th Century to the present day. It’s so nice to live in a bubble where we tell ourselves that this country has a racially peaceful past but comforting yourself with lies and fabrications can never have a good outcome.

This is where education plays a primary role. I remember sitting in a high school classroom learning about the Treaty of Waitangi in the most boring way possible year after year, the same information with such little depth. It almost stops at the two different translations, unless things have changed since I was at school. It isn’t until year 13 history when you really gain a comprehensive understanding of the realities of the historical events and their repercussions. And of course, by then it’s an optional subject.

The number of times I’ve heard people say that Maori complain unnecessarily and question why they think they’re so entitled is disgusting. Such people know nothing about structural racism. It’s like people who say that sexism and misogyny doesn’t exist anymore, or those who say that people with disabilities no longer have any societal limitations. Only people who live the realities of being marginalised everyday will understand how ridiculous these claims are.

If we don’t open our eyes and start to see such grievances as serious and legitimate issues, nothing is ever going to change. But to build a socially conscious society where people can understand why things are the way that they are and why they need to change immediately, we need to understand the significant role the schooling system plays in making that happen.

A three hour seminar in Hamilton called ‘Just One Day’ is to be held at the end of this month that will provide employers with information pertaining to hiring employees with disabilities.

With employment statistics for people with disabilities as low as they currently are, these are exactly the types of seminars that should be held across the country.

The current stigma is that people with disabilities just don’t want to work and this is simply incorrect. The reason why these statistics are so low is because the misconception that we are less capable is still very much alive and kicking.

The truth however is that the opposite is true. According to Enrich + executive leader employment Martyn Parkes, “people with a disability are often more motivated and more committed and they just want to be given an opportunity. That is what employers want at the end of the day, someone who is motivated and hard working.”

This hits the nail on the head. We will never know of anyone’s full potential or the invaluable contribution they can make to this world unless we give them a chance. This isn’t just the case for people with disabilities – its true for everyone but we need to collectively break down the structural injustices that prevent this from happening.

This is where education comes in. Age-old beliefs regarding people of difference are not going to go away overnight, which is why we have to continuously work at breaking them down.

Progress on this front is absolutely happening and we have come a long way; we have to appreciate that. But I’m tired of people saying this and leaving it at that. Gratitude and complacency are two very different things and that’s the first thing we need to acknowledge in order to progress further.

Am I the only one who finds it super ironic that the government passes a bill that gets rid of tea breaks on the week of Labour Day?

It seems like everyone has forgotten what that day is meant to be celebrating. I know I had no idea until a few years ago. Something vague about workers’ rights and 8 hour days dating back to like ages ago. Or something.

Now I know why there was never much emphasis placed on the significance of that day. It’s because if you work an 8-hour day these days, you’re one of the lucky ones who doesn’t have to work crazy hours or 2 jobs just to put food on the table because the rising cost of living is showing no sign of slowing down. Now with the rights of employers to slash one of the few opportunities for downtime that workers have, I’m starting to wonder what could possibly be next.

I can sit here and go on a rampage criticizing the National-led government for not knowing or caring what real workers and families go through but I’m not going to do that. We all saw it coming; the past 6 years has led to the point where ridiculous, industrial age, bourgeois mentalities run the government, yet this is still what New Zealand voted for.

This is what happens when personality politics clouds critical judgement on issues and policies that actually matter.

Child poverty is still a scarily serious problem in this country and house prices are soaring through the roof to the point where it is simply impossible for the average New Zealander to buy a home. There is also little accountability by the government for these problems.

The Child Poverty Action Group has said that the current actions taken by the Key led government is simply not substantial enough. Key also came out and basically said that first homebuyers should consider buying an apartment rather than a house, as if the solution to this issue is as simple as that.

Yet when I check the news what are the first two things I see? We have a serious chocolate milk shortage and creepy Santa might be a no show this Christmas.

I may have just had one of those weeks where every little thing pissed me off because I don’t understand how these are New Zealand’s most pressing issues right now.

I mean, I’ve tried the liquid gold and its pretty amazing but we’ve shown the true colours of our demanding, mass consumption culture when we expect something as obscure as flavoured milk right at this very second and get shitty when we can’t have it. This is a small company that is already doing everything they can to keep up with demand. Cut them some slack, guys.

And about this Queen Street Santa, or whatever he’s called. I’ve lived in Auckland my entire life and feel zero connection to that installation. At first I thought it was because I don’t celebrate Christmas, but then I found out it costs $150,000 to put that thing up every year, and then I thought no, this is ridiculous. Think of how much food you can give to schools so they can feed hungry students with that money. Food for thought.

The elections may be over but the same issues still persist. I’m not saying not to have these things in the news. If this is what kiwis are truly worried about, by all means, go for it. However I’m sick of reading the news as if New Zealand is some type of utopia where ours biggest problems include chocolate milk and a giant Santa, because it definitely isn’t and we know it.

Last week, Malala Yousafzai was the co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize. Since her exposure to the worldwide spotlight, her spirit, wisdom and strength have touched the hearts of people everywhere.

However, there have been cynics who have argued that the West’s infatuation with her is the result of a constructed ‘White Saviour Complex’ type narrative, orchestrated to justify military intervention in the region. UK journalist Assed Baig wrote “the actions of the West, the bombings, the occupations, the wars all seem justified now, “see, we told you, this is why we intervene to save the natives.”

Yousafzai started advocating for girl’s education long before the world knew her name, knowing full well that it would put her life at risk. Being shot by the Taliban showed the world how hard the local population have to fight for something that we take for granted.

I would agree with Baig when he says that her experience is being used to justify further intervention. It’s fairly easy to come to that conclusion when you realise that the mainstream media seem to pick and choose which of her speeches they want to expose to the public. Few outlets reported on her statement that socialism is the only way to ‘free us from the chains of exploitation and bigotry’. Why? Because that goes against their own agenda and they cant have that.

More profound than that though, is when she questioned President Obama’s drone activity in the Middle East. Expressing her concerns about how these are exacerbating animosity and hate in the region is huge in itself. It shows her understanding that the West’s definition of ‘helping’ is actually having the opposite effect. It’s the White Saviour Complex in action. But the fact that the White House refused to comment on this particular part of the conversation is really telling. I still want to know what his reaction was because the innocent lives taken in these attacks is so unnecessary and unfair that one has to question what the overall aim was in the first place. I refuse to accept that they were done in the name of ‘safety’.

While media outlets, governments and corporations are trying to morph her into what they want her to be, Malala is holding her own and for that I commend her. She has looked 2 oppressors and indoctrinators in the eye – one who held a gun to her head and the other who orders mass civilian deaths from behind closed doors – and still refused to step down. If a woman like that hasn’t let the fear of her life or the worldwide attention and accolades give up her message by now, its never going to happen no matter how hard they try. I would even go so far as to say that this claim that she is being groomed is to disrespect her painful experience.

There are people all over the region who are fighting against extremism and violence, both domestic and foreign. Another Pakistani family from North Waziristan flew to the USA after a drone strike hit their village and killed their family members, to simply ask why? What was the point? Another artist in Khyber Paktunkhwa, Pakistan laid down a giant portrait of a child victim to show them just who they’re killing.

While I admire her courage, Malala Yousafzai is not a lone ranger. We should stop seeing her as such and start seeing her as a strong symbol of the intense resistance by locals themselves against domestic and foreign oppression that is occurring in the region. She is one of many and her speeches reflect that she humbly believes this about herself.

People often underestimate how much people with disabilities rely on public transport. For people like myself who cant drive, public transport is the only other option after waiting for someone to drive you to where you need to go. Accessible taxis are hardly, an option; the price is still too steep, even after the Total Mobility Scheme subsidy. For many people with disabilities who rely on welfare, options are further reduced.

Aucklanders are lucky in this regard. AT’s accessibility concession gives us child prices, so long as their morale can handle the odd driver who is reluctant to help them, but that is a separate matter altogether.

Those in other parts of the country however, do not enjoying that same privilege. Learning disability self-advocacy organisation, People First are currently aiming to provide a discount bus card for people with disabilities in Tauranga. This will be a similar scheme to the Gold Card for the elderly.

This is the type of lobbying that needs to occur across the country. Better yet, I would like to see legislation, much like the Gold Card scheme that ensures commuters with disabilities can gain affordable and reliable public transport.

This is simply a case of improving the quality of life for a group of people who are traditionally expected to be invisible in society. This is an out-dated mentality that has no place in this day and age. In order for us to change this however, we need to make seriously large steps in the direction of fairness, acceptance and inclusion. Easily accessible and affordable transport across the country is one of these crucial steps.

Banning the burqa has come into debate in Australia once again. It’s times like this where I hate reading the news because I just know the type of bigoted, Islamophobic nonsense I’m going to see. But some things you just cant ignore.

The catalyst for this was when a young Muslim man Omarjan Azari, 22, was allegedly planning on committing a ‘horrific’ act. So instead of examining the psychological state of this young man and reprimanding him accordingly, they took it as an opportunity to awaken that beast named ‘racism’ that everyone seems to love so much.

As a response to this, Sydney and Melbourne was swept up by a wave of hate crimes towards women in hijab and men who look like they might be Muslim. Just like every other time, 1.5 billion Muslims, myself included, are now expected to account for the ridiculous actions of a few fanatics.

Then somehow in this kerfuffle began the ‘ban the burqa’ conversation, because any time to question whether women should be able to dress however they want can never be passed up. Obviously. And before anyone tries to argue that in ‘those’ countries women don’t have the freedom to dress how they want to – yes, this is true in some countries, but Australia and New Zealand are not one of those countries where this happens. If we start banning the burqa, we’re doing the same thing that we’re criticising them for. Feminism is about a woman’s choice and banning items of clothing is an infringement of that choice.

As ridiculous as Tony Abbott’s politics are, it’s still scary when the Prime Minister of a country is essentially saying that he wishes minority women don’t dress in whichever way they choose to. Saying that he finds it confronting only shows how poor his understanding of this particular community is, and if you want them to feel enfranchised and included in your country, this is not the statement or stance you should be making. All it is likely to do is exacerbate that feeling of disassociation and for the sake of achieving long-term prosperity and harmony, this is so unbelievably far from productive.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/10/05/banning-the-burqa-why/feed/27Another Labour leader has resigned and as per usual, the media lost its mindhttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/29/another-labour-leader-has-resigned-and-as-per-usual-the-media-lost-its-mind/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/29/another-labour-leader-has-resigned-and-as-per-usual-the-media-lost-its-mind/#commentsSun, 28 Sep 2014 18:00:13 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=52962

Another Labour leader has resigned and as per usual, the media lost its mind.

I know the Labour party has its problems and I’m not even going to try to prescribe what should be done about it. But what I do know is that the media speculation has been unnecessarily over the top and unhelpful.

Look at the front page of the Weekend Herald for example. Paparazzi style pictures of David Cunliffe on a beach near his home burying his head in his hands and a caption saying that it shows the ‘desolation’ of the Labour leader. I see this as a waste of time, energy and irrelevant to what we should actually be talking about.

By all means, have debates and discussions about where the party should go from here amongst people who are qualified to do so. But leave the guy alone and be respectful of his privacy.

The last thing I want to see is the New Zealand media follow even further on the path of Americanisation with regard to the obsession over public figures. Why everyone goes crazy over what goes on in the private lives of these people is beyond me.

Where Cunliffe goes to retreat is no one’s business but his own. To be the leader of the opposition who had an important decision to make already put him in a high-pressure situation. The least productive thing is to put these pictures on the front page and have the most theatrical caption on it.

But unfortunately, I’m here bracing myself for what the next few weeks will bring on everyone’s favourite newspaper.

Oh boy.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/29/another-labour-leader-has-resigned-and-as-per-usual-the-media-lost-its-mind/feed/6Why I voted Labour and why 2017 will be differenthttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/21/why-i-voted-labour-and-why-2017-will-be-different/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/21/why-i-voted-labour-and-why-2017-will-be-different/#commentsSat, 20 Sep 2014 21:30:59 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=52745As a 3nd and 5th generation Kiwi-Indian (depending on which side of the family we have to go with), my relationship with New Zealand is a special one. Like other New Zealanders who are not of the Caucasian variety, the greatest struggle is finding your place in a country where your customs are not easily understood, leading to you having to dismiss the ‘strange’ part of your identity in order to fit in. This struggle is particularly hard when you have a disability. It wasn’t until my last couple of years of high school when I decided that I hate sandwiches and would actually rather take last night’s curry in a Tupperware container to school instead. Yea, people will give me funny looks, but I was determined to own that shit, and I did.

Without divulging into the ins-and-outs of my family history, as interesting as it may be, the bottom line that this is where we ended up. My ancestors and grandparents came to New Zealand where their grandchildren and decedents can have a fair shot no matter what their background is, where honest and hardworking parents can put food on the table and be their own landlord, where everyone can have equal access to healthcare and education and where the government is honest, has the people’s best interest and doesn’t allow its self to become puppets of a manipulative superpower.

I love the Indian culture because of the emphasis on forming meaningful relationships with your elders. One thing all 4 of my grandparents have taught me is that no matter where we end up, never forget where we started and definitely do not pull the ladder out from under you. Personally, I have no idea what its like to watch my parents struggle to keep a roof over the heads of my sisters and I, but this is because my grandparents and parents had the opportunity offered to them to build something for themselves here, which was meant to pave the path for those to come. Unfortunately, the current neo-liberalistic climate is making it impossible for young people to leave anything behind for their children, even after working themselves to the bone.

With all of this in mind and in honour of the past and future generations, I gave my party vote to Labour.

I am eternally grateful to the Labour Party. After all, it was Labour’s immigration reform that allowed my family to migrate to New Zealand after the 1987 Fiji coup in the first place. It was because of this that I, a Gujarati Muslim woman in a wheelchair could gain a tertiary education without any major trauma or hindrances. It really had nothing to do with me. So much of that is accredited to a society culture that believes in helping each other out. Of course there was still discrimination and marginalization at the best of times, but in the past 6 years we’ve only gone backwards.

From the results this weekend, I’m wondering just how bad things have to get before New Zealand finally wakes up. I do believe however, that by 2017 we will. It’s regretful that things have to get worse before it can get better but the important thing is to always keep fighting. The future generations are depending on it.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/21/why-i-voted-labour-and-why-2017-will-be-different/feed/13Optional Protocol to the Convention of the Rights of People with Disabilitieshttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/07/optional-protocol-to-the-convention-of-the-rights-of-people-with-disabilities/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/09/07/optional-protocol-to-the-convention-of-the-rights-of-people-with-disabilities/#commentsSat, 06 Sep 2014 20:17:32 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=52021

ACT party candidate David Seymour has recently said that New Zealand shouldn’t join the United Nations Security Council because it was ‘not a credible organisation’. This comment was made after candidates were asked if their parties would accept the Optional Protocol to the Convention of the Rights of People with Disabilities. This would give people the right to appeal to the UN if their rights within their own countries are not being recognised.

I don’t see anything wrong with this; in fact I support it entirely. People with disabilities are still one of the most vulnerable in this country and throughout the world. We are one group whose rights are continuously trampled over and forgotten.

This protocol will give an avenue, once all others are exhausted, for people with disabilities to ensure that their rights are acknowledged in a society where they are often overlooked. This is simply a human rights issue. Labour candidate Carmel Sepuloni and Green MP Mojo Mathers say their parties are committed to signing the optional protocol. This is because these two parties understand marginalisation and how to tackle it.

Of course I have my issues with the UN. Their complacency when it comes to disciplining Israel after their gross human rights violations in Gaza and illegal stealing of land in the West Bank is not something we should be overlooking. New Zealand made ourselves known to the world in the 1980s when we took a stand against nuclear testing in the Pacific. We must continue this legacy of being the little guy who can stand alone as long as it means standing for what is right.

Seymour’s main argument was that we should not be allowing terrorist states with questionable values such as Afghanistan and Zimbabwe to tell us what to do. This is absolutely true, but I do find this statement coming from the right wing very ironic given that John Key has made it a priority to strengthen ties with Obama over the past 6 years, even though Obama is also guilty of such pretty horrific crimes himself. I don’t remember them ever speaking out against the USA.

If we’re going to take a stand against the UN on anything, it should be against issues such as this, not on whether people with disabilities should have their rights acknowledged. This shows me where the priorities of the political parties lie this election year.

I’m sure I’m not the only one who tried to vote online for the leaders debate and couldn’t because the website was down. The next option was the txt vote, 75c a pop of course. So I’m not surprised that National ‘won’ the debate given that it wasn’t exactly a fair voting system.

Labour clearly won in the social media though and to me, this is the type of ‘voting’ that gives a more accurate reflection of what New Zealanders think.

PM John Key’s dismissal and deflective reaction to the hard-hitting questions and rebuttals by David Cunliffe was very obvious and when I jumped onto Twitter, I was glad to see that people other than me noticed that.

This dismissive attitude has been a running theme in this National led government over the past 6 years and it is becoming clearer that New Zealanders have simply had enough of it. We need and deserve answers to these questions.

National may have ‘officially’ won the leaders debate but in this day and age, social media gives a more accurate indication of how people are going to vote on Election Day, and from what I saw online, I’m not that concerned anymore.

The human right of people with disabilities in New Zealand has come back into the spotlight by the Human Rights Commission.

The report named ‘Making Disability Rights Real’ highlights some of the main issues as being adequate data collection, accessibility, education, violence and abuse, and building a people driven system.

This list covers all the basics of what needs to be reviewed in order to improve the quality of life for the disabled community. I believe that the most important out of these 5 issues however, is the urgency of developing a people driven system – particularly people who are from the specific community of concern.

No one else quite knows or understands the structural and daily problems faced by the vastly diverse disabled community in this country than those who experience it and those who are constantly exposed to them; such problems occur due to the aforementioned inadequacies in accessibility, education, and violence and abuse.

The campaign to increase the number of broadcasted shows that have closed captioning would not be happening if the deaf community had the agency and the means to highlight this as a legitimate hindrance in their ability to integrate and be included in the mainstream experiences. I also doubt that those who do not require closed captioning would have recognised this as something that needs to be addressed, myself included.

This is just one clear example of how effective and positive change can happen if the people who understand the issues through lived experience are the driving forces behind the campaigns in question.

It’s not about being able to identity these needs yourself; it’s about listening to those who actually are able to, taking them seriously and treating them like human beings who have something to say. This is what ‘human rights’ is all about.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities found that ‘New Zealanders with intellectual or learning disabilities are dying up to 23 years before the rest of the population’.

For a country that prides itself in looking after one another (or at least, we used to), this is a disgrace and something I, as a kiwi, am ashamed of.

This is an issue that has always been the reality, but this should not be the case in 2014 New Zealand. Progress regarding the care support and medical treatment of people with any kind of disability has been pretty stagnant, which is made clear by the fact that simple solutions are still not being practiced, and I have no idea why.

One the cross-government priorities in the 2014-18 Disability Action Plan are to address these pertinent issues. This will be a welcome change but I would like to see action in order for me to believe that they can walk the talk.

The report clearly states that one of the key steps is to include people with intellectual and learning into the decision making process so that they can collectively come up with holistic and effective solutions to this issue of disability care. Including those who will be directly affected by such decisions can never go wrong; to not do so is an insult to the struggles and realities of the community in question, including the disabled community.

For some reason I hardly have good news to talk about, but this week, in and amongst the turmoil currently going on throughout the world, there was a glimmer of hope for humanity here in our little neck of the woods; over-the-phone voting for people with disabilities.

This service will be available to those who are blind, partially blind, or have a physical disability that prevents them from marking their ballot papers independently.

This may seem like a somewhat small step, but it’s a step nonetheless and more importantly, a step in the right direction. As with everything, it took a significant amount of campaigning to make this happen, which cannot be ignored.

Anything that makes it easier for people with disabilities to exercise their democratic rights is a wonderful thing. All I seem to hear about are news stories about people ignoring the needs of my community. It is a much needed breath of fresh air to see someone, in this case the Electoral Commission, acknowledge this particular difficulty and putting measures in place to address the issue.

Most importantly, its acknowledging the fact that people with disabilities have something to say, and that is the most powerful aspect of this situation. Our quality of life and future prospects are deteriorating. With more people with disabilities being able to vote, governments and political parties will no longer be able to ignore the fact that we are, in fact, here.

Of course we still have an incredibly long way to go for equal rights, but with this being put in place it will allow for that change to finally happen.

In the past couple of weeks I have heard a lot of people say that they are neither Pro-Israel nor Pro-Palestine; they are pro-peace. This is a stand that I respect. Everyone is genuinely pro-peace in their hearts, but in this context I don’t really understand what this means.

Everyone already knows what it means to be Pro-Israel or Pro-Palestine. In order to be ‘pro-peace’ however, being anti colonisation and anti occupation is a fundamental part of that, because while these two things exist and are endorsed, there will never be true, long-lasting peace. Peace and occupation are two things that will obviously never go hand-in-hand. This should really go without saying.

Therefore in order to be ‘pro-peace’, one is ‘pro-Palestine’ by default. So why can’t people just say that?

The mainstream narrative in the media makes it hard for people to say that, although I do believe that the power dynamic is changing with the rise of social media and alternative journalism.

The facts and history about the conflict and current situation speak for themselves though, which is the reason why claiming to be pro-peace in the face of genocide is a cop out. It’s a form of silence and neutrality, and as Archbishop Desmond Tutu says ‘If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality”.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/07/27/pro-israel-pro-palestine-or-pro-peace/feed/28End the occupation to end the rocketshttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/07/20/end-the-occupation-to-end-the-rockets/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/07/20/end-the-occupation-to-end-the-rockets/#commentsSat, 19 Jul 2014 18:37:31 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=49403

The events of the last few days have been overwhelming to say the least. The atrocities towards the Palestinians has escalated with the ground invasion and a plane was shot down over Ukraine; basically senseless and unnecessary killings are occurring en masse in this world we all share today. Not only that but when you look at why these are occurring, there is no way to justify it. In the name of what can one ever justify this mess?

One event that tipped me over the edge was when I found out about the rehabilitation centre for the disabled that was bombed, not to mention the 2 hospitals. The IDF want to show how merciful they are by saying that they warned the hospital of the attack. I don’t know which is worse; the attack itself, or eliciting a sense of fear and confusion on a group of people who are already the most vulnerable. If you ask any person who is or has cared for someone living with a disability, they will tell you how incredibly difficult it is to move people with disabilities quickly, let alone with the added commotion. This, above everything else, proves that they will stop at nothing.

If this doesn’t show people why they should get behind the Palestinian cause, quite frankly nothing will. I find it hard to believe that the Palestinian children and these patients were Hamas militants, which shows that this isn’t about stamping out terrorists. It’s about genocide.

The people who want to say that this is the fault of Hamas simply lack depth in knowledge about this situation. The fact that Hamas even exists is a symptom of the disease of occupation. Obama may be right in saying that no country would tolerate rockets flying in from outside their borders, but no people would tolerate being occupied in their own land.

The solution to this mess is clear: if Israel genuinely wanted to end the rockets, end the occupation.

Since the violence between Israel and Palestine escalated, I’ve been avoiding the major news outlets such as BBC and CNN because I already knew what they were going to say and how they were going to frame the events.

It will be along the lines of ‘rockets were fired from Gaza so Israel had to strike back infinitely stronger in the name of ‘self-defence’. Honestly, I’m sick of hearing that skewed narrative.

However when I tuned in to the New Zealand news, I saw that our news is not exactly exempt from that same formula, albeit without the intense support and sympathy for Israel.

Even though our news did mention the shocking statistics, the wording and manner of description makes all the difference. To structure the description of events in this particular order creates the sense that one side is to blame and the other is simply protecting themselves.

After digging just a bit deeper into the history and details of the conflict, the absurdity of this claim is crystal clear to anyone who is willing to open their eyes and see it. USA backed Israel with the world’s most sophisticated weaponry are forced to ‘protect themselves’ from people who basically live in an open air prison and have no army or no such weaponry? Really? As George Galloway described it, Palestinians are being ‘slaughtered like fish in a barrel’.

But what I am happy to see is the increasing number of people who are starting to see through the propaganda.

The rise of social media has given people the opportunity to gather their information from a variety of sources. This means that more people are realising who the real perpetrator is and it’s definitely not the oppressed and colonised population, because it never is. I’m relieved to see an increasing number of people waking up, doing their research and gathering a more holistic and accurate account of events. Less people are buying into the ‘self-defence’ argument, and this is the exact change we need to see in the world in order to play our part to stop the atrocities.

In the past, the power of divestment, boycott and peaceful protest has already proved to us that it is stronger than anyone could’ve imagined. Remember South Africa? When everyone said that it couldn’t be done, it got done. The same can happen now. All it takes is education and activism.

Education about diversity and disability needs to start as early as possible. Discrimination, stereotyping and prejudice are not born qualities, which means they can be eradicated. Getting rid of bullying altogether is not something I see happening anytime soon although I would love to see that day. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be taking drastic steps to reduce it for the sake of all children, disabled or not. It is worth mentioning that teenagers perpetrate the bullying mentioned in this article, which is all the more reason why we should be implementing long-standing and effective education about people of difference.

The natural curiosity of children means that they will of course ask questions when someone enters the classroom that has a visible point of difference. In fact I would even go so far as to say that this is something that needs to be encouraged in order to increase awareness about the reality of minorities. From what I’ve seen and experienced, once they know abilities and limitations they instantaneously are willing to accommodate accordingly.

Therefore it makes me wonder why once we get to workforce, employers are unwilling to make those same considerations and modifications. Where are we going wrong? Is it a flawed education system where students are congratulated for standardising to the ‘norm’ rather than nurturing their own differences and strengths? Or is it an obsession with profit and cost cutting at the expense of the wellbeing of entire communities? I would say it’s a combination both.

The only thing stopping a person with a visual impairment practicing law is the hoards of people saying that it can’t be done before making sure that it indeed doesn’t happen. I would say that this is a form of bullying.

Until we change our focus from standardisation and pressuring others to conform to taking care of one another so that we can all move forward together, this cycle with surely perpetuate.

“A total of 1.1 million people (24 percent of the population) were identified as disabled. The results show that 11 percent of children and 27 percent of adults were limited in their daily activities by a range of impairments.”

This study shows just how important it is for New Zealanders to work towards a more accepting and inclusive society. For a quarter of New Zealanders to be limited in their daily activities shows the lengths we still need to go to in order to improve this situation.

While the current government is trying to kick disability access out of the equation in order to strengthen buildings for earthquakes, this is just the statistic we need to illustrate just how detrimental the effects of that would be. The study did show that the majority of the people with disabilities are over the age of 65, which also shows that limited access is an aspect of ageism as well as ableism.

It’s easy to look at this as just a number but it is important to note that for these people with disabilities, this isn’t just a statistic. These limitations are our daily reality and the frustration cuts deep.

In saying that though, I think that these statistics speak for themselves and it is an important piece of information for New Zealanders to be aware of. I do believe that the majority of us don’t want to live in a country where 1 out of 4 Kiwis have to live their lives with limitations.

The amount of pressure put under students, as well as the competitive environment of the workforce is out of hand.

Having a degree is no longer seen as enough given the inflation of the number of people who have a tertiary qualification, which in itself a great thing. However, the heightened competiveness means that the next competitive elements are grades, GPAs, and other arbitrary markers of ‘intelligence’. Everyone learns in different ways and this is hardly considered, but that is a separate issue altogether. The next competitive element is higher degrees such as Honours and Masters, which of course not everyone can afford to do anymore due to student allowance cuts.

The current economic climate means that job are scarce and money is tight, creating the sense that it may not even be worth it, not to mention the anxiety surrounding where to go and what to do after graduation. The burden of having a student loan hovering over your head and having no way of paying it off is a huge one. What the concern should be on instead is enjoying learning, fostering personal and interpersonal growth and being in the student environment where everyone is there to learn off one another.

Like all drugs, targeting the people who illegally supply them won’t do much to fix the problem. Providing proper support for students will and there is a tonne of work that needs to be done about this.

It currently takes around 3 weeks to get an appointment with a university counsellor, which is at least free. This is due to severe under resourcing and the fact that there are just not enough counsellors to deal with the amount of students who require this service. It’s for this reason that it’s hardly advertised that this service is even there. This is only one example of the types of steps they should be taking rather than wasting resources in less effective places.

This issue of what they’re calling ‘academic doping’ in New Zealand is not nearly as big as it is in other countries, but it can be in the future if pressures put on students aren’t regulated.

A recent article on BBC News explores the misconception that people with disabilities are unhappy. While research shows that the opposite is true, able-bodied people still believe that having a disability means that one no longer has a good quality of life.

From experience as a wheelchair user, I can confidently say that one of the hardest things to deal with are other people’s attitudes towards you and physical barriers; basically, things that are outside our own immediate control.

Its important to point out that for a lot of us, there are definitely internal and psychological processes we have to go through in learning to love ourselves and embrace our differences despite such barriers. While this is difficult enough as it is, it makes it harder to accept your difference when the people around you treat you differently from others, mainly in a patronising way, based on that difference. It’s incredibly frustrating when people who don’t even know anything about me give me the sympathetic look followed by a pat on the head.

This article talks about the “disability paradox”, where the quality of life for a disabled person is just as good, if not better than that of an able-bodied person despite the stigmatisation that the quality of life would surely be worse. I can’t speak for the entire disabled community, but from my own experience I can say that the lessons learnt from having a disability far outweigh the day-to-day difficulties that I have to go through and the rough periods that I have been during the past, and probably will go through in the future as well.

I also don’t believe that this makes me ‘special’ in any kind of way. There’s not a single person in this world who hasn’t been through rough patches and grown as a person as a result of that. The only difference with people with disabilities, particularly a visible disability is that the very visibility of my hardship is the basis by which people make their first impressions about me. Not only that, but something about the wheelchair makes people think that we are less competent of navigating ourselves in the world.

This navigation doesn’t have to be difficult, but because there is no such thing as an equal playing field when it comes to equal treatment and access, it is difficult. The actual disability doesn’t have to be the source of one’s unhappiness but living in a world that was built to systematically keep people of ‘difference’, people like you, on the margins of society would be a reason to be unhappy.

At the risk of sounding soppy and sentimental, the resilience of people with disabilities mean that we can generally deal with it when shit hits the fan. But we shouldn’t have to. Everyone’s unique worldview and life experiences should be celebrated and embraced and that is the world we should be building; not one where difference is seen as a disadvantage and to be responded to with sympathy.

A couple of weeks ago I attended a talk by Jeremy Scahill about his book ‘Dirty Wars’ at the Auckland Readers and Writers Festival. Scahill was a war reporter who wrote this book about the war crimes and cover-ups being committed by the United States in the Middle East. At the book signing that followed, my friend asked him if there was a degree of privilege attached to him being able to write this book as a white American. His response was an immediate ‘absolutely’. He proceeded to explain how every single one of his friends who are Muslim journalists have told him that if they wrote that exact same book, they would have been detained.

I was slightly shocked when I heard this. Not because I didn’t think it was true, but because hearing a white man say it weirdly legitimised something that I’ve always thought to be true as a wheelchair user, an Indian and a Muslim woman. I greatly respect how Scahill recognises the privilege attached to his whiteness.

There are certainly double standards when it comes to who has the ‘right’ to be political. Access affects my day-to-day life but when I’ve complained about disability access and transport issues some people have responded with ‘but at least it’s better than what you would’ve had if you were still in Fiji or India’ in the tone of ‘have you no gratitude?’ Of course I appreciate the progress New Zealand has made but this doesn’t mean that I have to settle for a country that has inequalities. On a side note, I was born here and while I have an emotional connection to these two places of where I have roots, I can’t ‘still’ be in a place where I never even lived.

When it comes to expressing political concern, the same goes for ethnic and religious minorities but with more severe consequences. The political, ideological or economical climate in a particular time and place means that the group who are either oppressed or unpopular are the ones whose voices get misconstrued by the media and this filters into the psyche of the masses, leading to the irrational vilification and demonization of an entire group of people.

Recent history is filled with such events. Those who fight for their human rights are threats and other unpopular groups are blamed for everything and gotten rid of. Jews were blamed for all of Germany’s problems pre-WW2. Black Civil Rights Activists in the USA were persecuted. The ANC were called terrorists. Idi Amin expelled the Indians from Uganda because he believed them to be money-hoarders. The same almost happened to Indo-Fijians in the 80s. Dawn Raids. Japanese Internment Camps. Palestinians throwing stones are somehow akin to IDF soldiers shotting missiles into heavily densely populated areas. I hate to think what would happen if Asian workers in modern-day slave states such as Qatar and the UAE started asking for equal rights. All of these situations are similar in the way the government in conjunction with the media made these groups out to be villains when they’re really the victims just so that the elite can protect an ideological agenda, racial superiority and the free acquiring of someone else’s resources.

The shunning that Muslims have to face around the world post-9/11 is the current example of this, to the point where being a Muslim male in the wrong place at the wrong time gets you sent to Guantanamo Bay. Being a male above the age of 16 in rural Yemen makes you a terrorist, which warrants the release of a drone missile through your village. Such paranoia is so strong that even Yusuf Islam a.k.a. Cat Stevens, who wrote “Peace Train” was banned from entering the USA with allegations that he has ties to terrorist organisations back in 2004. Both situations are equally barbaric and serve to brainwash the public into thinking we need to be feared just so that the 5 eyes, of which New Zealand is a part of, can continue with building surveillance states.

Meanwhile Muslims who live in countries where we are a minority have to tread on eggshells because we know that the media only feeds the public one narrative about us, to the point where some people resort to hiding this part of their identity to avoid judgement. One slip up or allegation and its in the papers, thereby undoing all the effort we put in to trying to convince everyone that we’re not the ‘other’, we don’t ‘hate the west’ and that we’re capable of love and goodness.

This also means that speaking out against the actions of the government carries a bigger risk for Muslims, which brings me back to the statement by Scahill. If a white man criticises New Zealand’s involvement or support of the USA’s illegal activity, it’s ok but put the same words in the mouth of an ethnic looking man with a beard and it’s a completely different story. Because of this, only those who are in positions of racial privilege can exercise the universal freedom of speech that we as a nation so proudly claim to have. Disagreeing with the government on issues such as the supporting of Israel and drone strikes does not mean you’re filled with hate. It means you disagree with the killing of innocent civilians, including plane hijackings and bombs on trains.

The building of the surveillance state has been justified by using heavy words like ‘jihad’, ‘extremism’ and ‘national security’. There are currently 16 CCTV cameras being installed in the Avondale mosque, where there were false accusations of such activities being promoted. Why they need so many, I have no idea. But what I do know is that if the mosque eventually opens, a space of reflection where Muslims go to find peace and sanctuary will be overshadowed by the overwhelming sense that Big Brother is watching, which he will be, thus nullifying the purpose of that space. Its not that we have anything to hide, it’s about the frustration of being treated as if you’re guilty until proven innocent simply because you belong to a religious group that your country, for one reason or another, is at war with.

I’m not saying that Muslims around the world are going to get shipped off somewhere en masse. But the theme of having to fabricate an enemy for political gain is a running theme throughout recent history and the current vilification of Muslims shows the persistence of that. I wrote this because as a Muslim, I want this to be the end of this ugly trend.

Recent NZ Herald articles have done a good job at scaremongering the New Zealand public into believing that the Avondale Mosque has been preaching ‘jihadi’ sentiment and extremism. As a member of the Avondale mosque congregation, I feel compelled to give the other side of the news, the side that the right-leaning NZ Herald has failed to give.

If the saying “cut the nose to spite the face” could be associated with any religious group then it surely is Muslims. Many followers of Islam are letting the religion down throughout the world. Take note that I make a deliberate distinction between Islam and Muslims.

The BBC TV series Citizen Khan gives an unfortunate but accurate description of people that run many mosques in immigrant communities around the world. The protagonist of Citizen Khan spends his time asserting his status as a “community leader” in an almost comic manner, with no real substance to his leadership. He expects that the community will automatically give him respect without the knowledge, compassion and concern for others that leaders should exhibit. People like Citizen Khan are mainly from the Indian Sub-Continent and have the assumption that their brand of Islam is the only legitimate form of Islamic practice.

This lack of appreciation of diversity is the root of the problem at Avondale mosque and the underlying reason for the headlines the conflict has attracted in the last couple of weeks.

The New Zealand Muslim Association (NZMA) was founded by mainly Indian migrants. My own great grandfather was one of its founding members and in the late 1950s contributed to building the first mosque in the country in Ponsonby. The NZMA has three branches, Ponsonby, Ranui and Avondale. Their historic and valuable contribution to our community has been overshadowed by the recent harmful actions of the association.

Four years ago a local member of Avondale mosque stood to be elected as the chairman of the mosque with plans of offering free Quran classes against a group who wanted to build a $4 million mosque. Two years after winning the election he had cleared the debt of that mosque and stood for re-election. At this point he was overthrown and a group unpopular with the local community was put in his place by the NZMA. Two months later this group was also overthrown causing the tensions between Avondale mosque and NZMA to increase.

Because NZMA officially ‘owns’ the mosque, they took it upon themselves to threaten and intimidate key people within the local administrative committee with trespass notices if they stood up to the NZMA.

Two years ago they created a new committee at the AGM which was meant to resolve all such issues. However, after the chairman took stress leave, NZMA appointed one of their own as the caretaker to fill his place despite the convention that this position should be filled by the Vice Chairman. To rub salt into the wound, this caretaker threatened the Sheikh by telling him that he would call the police if he led the prayers at the mosque.

The Avondale mosque committee did everything within their power to settle the issue in a civil and private manner. Since then there have been very few issues at the mosque with the NZMA retreating and the local congregation getting on with their work and worship.

Then in early May seemingly out of the blue, six local members of the congregation including the Iman had trespass notices writen for them. Apparently one of the trespass notices was issued because a member of the congregation raised $8000 for humanitarian causes in Syria. This was somehow deemed to be an unsavory and extremist action. Other accusations include training people to fight in Syria, something that is vehemently denied. While there is no proof to this claim, they used it as leverage to justify their bullying. These accusations have caused significant hurt within the local population leading to an unknown person regrettably assaulting an NZMA leader.

After this unfortunate incident, rather than attempting to resolve the recent issues internally the NZMA took this story to the press, both print and radio, gifting sensationalist content to the right wing media and blogosphere. It sadens me that our own “community leaders” are fuelling right-wing Islamophobia, and avoiding civil and responsible conflict resolution.

Over the last few years I’ve tried to come to terms with what the underlying issues are and my conclusion is that the NZMA fear difference. The difference they fear comes from the realisation that the congregation isn’t made up of people like them. The congregation at Ranui are of the same racial, ideological and socio-economical ilk as NZMA leaders and are therefore allowed to operate independently. This is in contrast with the Avondale congregation, which is rich with refugees, recent converts to Islam and people from outside the Indian sub-continent. If the Citizen Khans that run NZMA embraced the diversity that exist in Islam throughout New Zealand we will be out of the headlines and be free from having to defend ourselves from accusations of extremism.

It’s useful to know that no new mosques in the Auckland region have affiliated with NZMA because this once respected organisation no longer has much credibility or respect. While Avondale were building ramps for the disabled, NZMA were avoiding the issue of access. While Avondale were feeding and housing the homeless, NZMA were going on national TV and calling the homeless ‘a bunch of idiots’.

In reference to the latest sensationalist article in the NZ Herald, no one declared ‘jihad’ at the security guard. What actually happened is that the security guard was smoking inside (which is against the law) and walking in the mosque with shoes on, something that is unacceptable in a mosque (similar to a marae). When someone told him that he shouldn’t be doing that, the security guard made up a story about threats of jihad to take attention away from him disrespecting the mosque.

While such people cry ‘terrorism’, there are groups of Muslims throughout New Zealand whose actions contradict this claim. These groups conduct Sleeping Bag and Blanket Drives during the winter, create food banks, set up domestic violence shelters for Muslim women and children and so much more. These groups expect no praise; they continue with their hard work purely with the intention of helping those in need. Why? Because contrary to the mainstream narrative, Kiwi Muslims love this country and want to make a meaningful contribution. Its interesting that these have been created independently from Auckland mosque establishments. On a more positive note smaller Muslim communities around the country have taken a more community approach in their centres rather than being all about power and control.

When this story came out, I wasn’t going to feed into the media frenzy, but when people tell me to ‘go back to where I came from’, I have a right and responsibilty to defend my community. I refuse to allow racism, both external and internal to remain a sleeping beast. I hope the association of my great grandfather can remember its true purpose of supporting their community, not relentlessly bullying and intimidating people.

The one part of the Budget that surprised me the most was the government’s plan to make GP visits free until the age of 13, raising it from 6. While this looks excellent from the service, Associate Professor Mike O’Brien, Social Security Spokesman for the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) does a great job at pointing out the practical reality of this law.

“In an area like Northland with its huge geographical issues, for poor people living in isolated rural communities, free doctors’ visits were no use if you could not access them because of distance or inability to afford to get there.”

This shows a real lack of comprehensive analysis and strategic action regarding what the rural working class of New Zealand really need. And this isn’t just the case in Northland; it’s the realty throughout the country regarding arguably the most pressing issue this country is currently facing.

Here we’re seeing National attempt to adapt Labour’s policies without actually understanding the worldview and reality of families living in poverty. It’s presented under the expectation that New Zealanders will simply accept these policies at face value when in reality it serves no practical and effective purpose. And to be honest, I’m not too sure if I’m even surprised by this.

So, once again, at the risk of sounding like a broken record, the Budget shows National offering sugar coated policies that fail to properly reflect the biggest issues so many New Zealanders are experiencing and the solutions to them.

As much as certain people would like to deny this fact, the evidence and truth remains that income inequality in New Zealand is growing far too rapidly. An opinion piece in the NZ Herald talks about what that dynamic does to us at an individual level and for once, I think the Herald got it right.

“The naïve view of inequality is that it only matters if it causes poverty. But the truth is that we have deep-seated psychological responses to the levels of inequality in society. Our tendency to equate outward wealth with inner worth means that inequality colours our social perception. It invokes deep psychological responses – feelings of superiority and inferiority – and affects the way we see and treat each other”.

What came to mind when I read this piece is something that I once heard my dadi (paternal grandmother) say in the context of her own life experiences, which is that there’s nothing wrong with having money but those who have more of it are less likely to let go if it to help others, while those who have less are more willing to give to others.

This is obviously a generalisation. I myself have never known that feeling of not having enough for the bare necessities, and there are thousands of millionaires out there who give massive amounts of money and resources to those in need. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having money, but the essence of that statement and that sense of entitlement by a significant few remain. All you need to do is look at how unwilling we, as a society, are to raise the minimum wage. The United States’ 1% is an example.

The prevalence of the individualistic culture we’re all part of erases the sense of responsibility we should have over our fellow neighbours and creates the notion that ‘if I can do it, what’s stopping you?’ Or ‘I earned what I have through sheer hard work so you can just get off your lazy ass and do the same’. I personally reject the myth that single parents who work 2+ jobs and still struggle to make rent don’t work hard enough.

Saying baseless statements such as that perpetuate the myth that we’re all on an equal playing field, that there is no such thing as privilege. I recently purchased a new mobility vehicle, which the government paid $12,000 towards and we had to make up the rest. Now, for anyone who knows anything about mobility vehicles, that amount is not nearly enough, but we were able to top it up. This isn’t the case for everyone in the disabled community. This means that while they’re busy trying to save up the remaining amount, they have no way of getting around (except for taxies, which aren’t cheap either). This in turn reduces their opportunities for earning an income, thus their opportunities for purchasing that vehicle.

And that is how inequality prevails. What my dadi was ultimately saying, as I only gave one sentence from a much longer conversation, was that you can have all the money and material possessions your heart desires, but the fact will always remain that you live in a wider community and you are no more superior than anyone else if you have more than them just because of the context that you just happen to live within.

Basically, in intersectional speak: check your privilege.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/05/11/check-your-privilege-before-asserting-your-superiority/feed/4Putting the shoe on the other foot for disability rightshttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/05/04/putting-the-shoe-on-the-other-foot-for-disability-rights/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/05/04/putting-the-shoe-on-the-other-foot-for-disability-rights/#commentsSat, 03 May 2014 19:47:54 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=45930

This week Campbell Live conducted an experiment in Three Lamps, Auckland that replicated one that was done in Portugal last year.

Protesters, or in the New Zealand case the Campbell Live crew, filled empty car parks with wheelchairs that had signs on them imitating excuses given by able-bodied motorists who take up wheelchair parking spaces. Excuses include “I’ll only be 5 minutes” or “there are plenty of parks around the corner”.

All the motorists who were driving by had similar reactions; that it was an inconvenience to them but also that it was a good idea.

Personally I thought it was a brilliant idea. Putting the shoe on the other foot always seems to be the most effective way to prove to people that our screaming, yelling and angry spurts is for nothing. The point remains though that we shouldn’t have to resort to that sort of action. People should have the empathy to understand that these spots are reserved for us for a reason and that we need them for a reason.

We aren’t to know that you’re only going to be 5 minutes. When we see a spot that is taken by someone who shouldn’t be there, all we see is an inconvenience no matter how long they’re there for. And its not always just about how close it in to the destination, so the ‘there are other spots available’ excuse doesn’t really work either. These spots are also wider, which provides room for people who need to get in and out of their wheelchairs – something that is not so easy to do in an ordinary parking spot.

I hope this form of protest opens the eyes of people who don’t see the issue with parking in mobility parking spots. If it doesn’t, I don’t know what will.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/05/04/putting-the-shoe-on-the-other-foot-for-disability-rights/feed/4Why did it take the UN for ACC to do the right thing for people with disability?https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/27/why-did-it-take-the-un-for-acc-to-do-the-right-thing-for-people-with-disability/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/27/why-did-it-take-the-un-for-acc-to-do-the-right-thing-for-people-with-disability/#commentsSat, 26 Apr 2014 19:25:34 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=45572
This week saw a massive step forward for ACC clients who had previously seen their payments, and therefore their income cut for no real reason. Thanks to a United Nations committee bringing ACC to question about the matter, people with disabilities through accidents are finally having their voices heard about their inability to do just that previously. Warren Forster from the Injury support group Acclaim Otago said, “Finally, we have an international body saying to the New Zealand Government, ‘There’s an issue here and we’d like you to address this’. That is the first time that this has ever been done.”

To me this shows progress and it is always a good thing when people have their human right to have a voice back. While it is excellent that ACC clients can express their concerns about adequate funding as well as other disability related issues, there is another group of people who still have a long way to go in receiving adequate funding with minimal hassle. I hate to be the one to cast a dark shadow over a victory, but I’m going to anyway.

People with born disabilities, who go through the Ministry of Health, do not receive funding as quickly and as easily as people who have a disability as a result of an accident. I was born with a disability that didn’t show its symptoms until I was 11 years old. I remember having to wait an awful long time to receive any compensation for housing modifications, which also included a lengthy and painstaking paperwork process. Meanwhile, my day-to-day functioning was becoming increasingly difficult. This was happening as the person who suffered a horrific accident received everything they needed at the drop of a hat.

While I was obviously happy for them, I wondered why the processes were so different. However the disability occurred, the final situation is still the same and that should be all that is considered. Both groups of people still need extra assistance, regardless of what they are.

However, if there is anything that I want to make clear, it is that the fault is not with the people who work for these funding organisations. They are merely working within an already existing system that is flawed in itself. I remember my case-workers expressing their own disagreements with the way things are run.

Like I said, I am incredibly happy that the issue with the ACC has turned to favour the clients. As a proud New Zealander who believes in equal opportunity, I do hope these battles for acknowledgement continue to be won.

The reason behind them making it so difficult for these parents escapes me, and for once I’m actually surprised. According to the Ministry of Health only 121 parents are eligible for this payment and I can completely guarantee that there are more than that number of parents who require that payment in New Zealand but are not offered any such thing.

It’s not about handing out some kind of ‘sympathy payment’. It’s about understanding the practical realities of parents who are the primary caregivers of children who need extra assistance. This reality is that for a lot of these parents they can only have certain jobs that offer flexibility for them to work around their children’s timetables. This leads to employment discrimination as well as the inability to accept jobs that may offer a higher or more substantial wage for them to support their children as well as themselves and their families. This is why it’s only fair that parents are offered some kind of compensation in order to ease whichever situation they may be in.

However, this is an argument that has already been had. The issue is the way they are implementing it. The person with a disability has to apply for the payment, which makes sense on the surface. But if you dig a little deeper you’ll find that if they have an intellectual disability, banks don’t allow you to open an account. So where exactly is the money supposed to go? What now? What is the issue with allowing the parents to receive a payment rather than making the person with a disability the employer of their own parents?

This is only one example of many regarding how little thought went into the implementation of the scheme. So many people across the country were relying and depending on it to adequately support themselves while they are in a vulnerable position when it comes to having a substantial income. To make the process of applying for the payment so complex is to take advantage of the desperation of one of our country’s most vulnerable groups of people, which is the disabled community and their families

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/20/why-punish-the-parents-of-the-disabled/feed/1Apathy is not the solution to the problems we facehttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/13/apathy-is-not-the-solution-to-the-problems-we-face/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/13/apathy-is-not-the-solution-to-the-problems-we-face/#commentsSat, 12 Apr 2014 19:34:47 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=44884

In various conversations, I’ve realised that there is a type of trend with people, particularly the young, who think that that their actions won’t amount to much, thus leading to general inaction when it comes to injustice that they witness.

I’m not too sure where this mentality comes from, but it’s proving to have serious consequences; the shockingly low voter turnout that we saw in the last election is just one, yet a significant example. Had the attitudes not been one of ‘it won’t make a difference’, it is possible that the situation in this country could be very different right now. The same goes for boycotting products and companies that use unethical methods.

But it’s not only about doing that one thing every three years. Action can literally be taken every day – all it really takes is for people to be conscious of injustice, which requires education.

A few weeks ago I was looking for a parking spot and the only mobility parking spot that was a around was taken by a company car. I called the number that was displayed on the car and told the kind lady the situation. She was incredibly apologetic and grateful that I told her before ensuring she would do something about it.

A week later I was getting on the bus, which usually involves the vulnerable person in a wheelchair being stampeded over by people who think that getting on the bus will get them home quicker (it doesn’t by the way). Just as this was about to happen, a young boy in a high school uniform blocked off all the people trying to push me out of the way until I got on the bus comfortably and safely.

Want to make the world a nicer place to live in? These are only two examples out of plenty from lived experience I have up my sleeve. Actions that we seem to think are insignificant can make more of a significant difference than we think, especially if everyone can make the frequent kind, considerate gesture. Just by witnesses seeing that one person help me on to the bus, it’s highly likely that they would have realised how difficult it is for people in wheelchairs on public transport, which would lead them to be more considerate in the future. The sooner the mass public realise that it isn’t all about grand gestures, the better.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/13/apathy-is-not-the-solution-to-the-problems-we-face/feed/3Beneficiary Bashing On The Risehttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/06/beneficiary-bashing-on-the-rise/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/04/06/beneficiary-bashing-on-the-rise/#commentsSat, 05 Apr 2014 20:58:31 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=44584
In this week’s news we have seen our government, once again, engaging in beneficiary bashing.

According to Minister of Social Development Paula Bennett, New Zealanders who are receiving particular benefits, such as the Jobseeker Payment or the Supported Living Payment are abusing the ‘privilege’ by going on luxury overseas vacations.

Personally, I find it very hard to believe that the issue is as severe as Bennett claims it to be. Labour’s Social Development Spokeswoman Sue Moroney puts it better than I ever could. “If Paula Bennett thinks it’s easy to live on a benefit and somehow have money left over to go travelling, she needs to have a go at living on a benefit for a while and see how she gets on. Might have been the case in her day, but it’s not the case now.”

First and foremost, I think more of an effort needs to put into making it clear that people on the benefit are not really on it by choice, nor is it something that people generally brag about. It’s hardly considered a long-term solution. Instead it’s more of a measure taken out of necessity to provide for an individual and / or their families until another, more desirable option comes along.

This means that not only are beneficiaries are put into a situation where there are little or no other options they can take to look after themselves, but they are also demonised for being between a rock and a hard place, which is almost never out of choice.

Secondly, benefits only fund the bare necessities, which takes me back to Moroney’s point. To say that beneficiaries are living the high life and possibly taking innocent taxpaying New Zealander’s money overseas is a baseless argument. If the real issue was to stop hard-earned money going offshore and out of circulation in the New Zealand economy, which it should be, beneficiaries are not the culprits we should be targeting.

It’s possible that the beneficiary isn’t even the one funding their overseas trip and that it was for no legitimate reason; what if it was a gift from a family member or friend? What if they need to visit someone? Do they have to be sick in order to see them? a special occasion perhaps? These are only two of many possible scenarios. This shows a real lack of insight or an analysis of the situation from a holistic perspective. No one deserves to be bound to a country for reasons totally out of their control.

As election year is finally upon us, its time to reflect upon what the legacy of the past six years under the National led government has been and what it could continue to be if they are re-elected in September.

When I think back I notice a running theme, which is to ignore and most recently to create diversions. I’m not sure which is worse or if they are just as bad as each other. From the asset sales referendum, to the backlash against deep sea oil drilling and the destruction of the environment, to the sudden urge to change the flag amid a mountain of more pressing social issues New Zealanders are currently facing. How effectively we are tackling them however, is another question altogether.

The disabled community continues to be one of the most vulnerable in the country. Unemployment for people with both visible and invisible disabilities is still rampant, which means we are still over-represented in social welfare statistics against our will. Little has been done to fight the stigma that people who are welfare dependant are so by choice. Little has been done to change the structural discrimination people with disabilities face on a daily basis. In fact, one can argue that they have been reinforced. Look at the way this government is changing legislation so that new buildings don’t have to have wheelchair access. I’m not sure how anyone can see that as anything but a massive step backwards in terms of equal opportunities for all; an ideal that New Zealanders have traditionally valued and held dear to our hearts.

In the upcoming election this year I will be interested to see if there will be a shift in the way New Zealanders choose to cast their votes. In fact, I’m almost counting on it.

Earlier this week CCS Disability Action addressed the issue of employment discrimination for people with disabilities in New Zealand. This is a pressing issue that we as a country are severely lagging behind in.

While other countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States collect quarterly data regarding the unemployment rate for people with disabilities, New Zealand does no such data collection. This shows that the lack of awareness about employment discrimination for those with disabilities starts at the most basic level given that this really should be standard practice.

David Matthews, CCS Disability Action Chief Executive says, “Disabled people are overrepresented on benefits and in unemployment. In 2011, 35 per cent of people on a main benefit claimed a disability allowance. Only 45 per cent of disabled people were in the labour force compared to 77 per cent of people without disabilities.”

In order to address the issue of employment discrimination, we need to understand why it occurs. People with disabilities who are physically and mentally able to be in the workforce certainly do not like being welfare dependent for obvious reasons – being financially independent is the key ingredient for having autonomy over your own life for groups of people who have to be dependent on other people for significant aspects of their life. Therefore these stats should indicate marginalization at a structural level, which is the foundational issue that needs to be addressed. Unfortunately we still live in a society where significant portions of employers think that people with disabilities are somehow less competent than the able-bodied.

Mr Matthews then added, “Without accurate data, how do we know whether we are actually addressing the issue? When the government starts collecting regular data, I will know it is serious.” I agree with this completely. Collecting data is the most effective step the government can take to show that they are acknowledging the issue and collecting regular data is the best way to show how desperate the problem of employment discrimination for people with disabilities is in this country.

True and long-lasting inclusion of all sectors of our society occurs when the majority of the population bands together to make it happen. But it also happens when the people who have decision-making power are actually on our side.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/03/16/why-invisible-disability-employment-stats-make-things-worse-2/feed/3Social and cultural exclusion of the marginalisedhttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/03/09/social-and-cultural-exclusion-of-the-marginalised/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/03/09/social-and-cultural-exclusion-of-the-marginalised/#commentsSat, 08 Mar 2014 18:43:36 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=43082
It’s becoming increasingly obvious that a significant portion of mainstream society is still finding it difficult to understand how marginalisation works, which is the very reason why this ‘marginalisation culture’ continues to persist.

The Mojo Mathers ‘issue’, which isn’t even an issue at all, shows just how uncomfortable New Zealanders can be about certain communities receiving ‘special treatment’. I’ve been involved in some pretty painful debates against people who don’t believe that Maori and Pasifika shouldn’t receive ‘benefits’ such as tertiary scholarships. But it should be a real concern for New Zealand when people start to say that an MP with a hearing impairment shouldn’t spend taxpayer money to fly to Masterton to be interviewed because she needs to lip-read.

When I first heard about this story and the outrage surrounding her action, I first wondered what put people under the assumption that Mathers had a plethora of options as to what would be the most effective way of carrying out this interview. Then I became outraged over the outrage. Granted, the outcry didn’t last very long, but the point is that it shouldn’t have even happened at all.

Having a disability means that one has to approach certain situations differently to an able-bodied person. For example, I cant just get up and go out at a seconds notice; a certain amount of planning has to go into it such as checking for accessibility, organising transport etc. it shouldn’t be that hard to get things done but until conditions improve, its our reality. And in order to get crucial work done, you often have to do or spend extra money, which I would assume was the circumstance that Mathers was in and the primary reason why people with disabilities need a certain amount of financial assistance.

It’s interesting to see how persistent certain mentalities are in this ‘post-modern’ and ‘post-colonial’ society of ours. We say that we want to build an equal society where everyone is given an equal opportunity to perform to their potential and where anyone can be at the decision-making level in this country regardless of physical ability. But if this really and sincerely is the case we desperately need to start listening to all segments of our society, most importantly those segments that have faced a history of exclusion, marginalisation and discrimination – a history that we, as a country are still dealing with the repercussions of.

As a wheelchair user, going out can be one of the biggest nightmares. I know that must sound so depressing, but its outside forces that make this feeling a reality for wheelchair uses everywhere.

Limited access to certain buildings is the biggest factor of this. There’s nothing more disheartening than going out and having to change plans because the destination or venue wasn’t accessible. Then you have to deal with the way people treat you, which is equally off-putting. But there are other factors at play that add up and eventually take its toll.

Adequate parking availability is a big one. I know that there is regulation about that sort of thing but some of my experiences make me wonder about that. I’ve never been to a shopping centre or mall where disability parking spots aren’t available. But sometimes they’re so scarce that they get filled really quickly, and other times their location almost makes them redundant.

Some are placed on hills that are quite steep, others are narrower than they’re supposed to be and others have no curb to get the wheelchair onto the footpath – this is the most dangerous of the three possibilities.

Sometimes it can feel quite strange and trivial to argue that something as simple as parking can put you off going to a particular place, but able-bodied people who can park anywhere have the same mentality. I know a lot of Aucklanders who wouldn’t even bother driving into the CBD because parking is a nightmare, not to mention, unreasonably costly. Imagine that being the case for around 50% of places. This halves the amount of places you can even think about going to, which is a huge number.

It seems like the Paralympics just don’t attract as much attention as the ‘normal’ Olympics. Why? I’m not too sure but it’s a result of an under appreciation of the achievements of the differently abled community.

In the 2012 London Olympics, the Olympic coverage was in full force: multiple different channels added to Sky as well as extensive coverage of Prime and the front page of the NZ Herald dedicated to medalists on many occasions. Come time for the Paralympics and no such attention was given, other than Stephen Hawkins speech in the opening ceremony. I can only predict that the same will be the case for the 2014 Winter Paralympics.

I’m not saying I don’t enjoy the Olympics. As an avid sports fan it’s in my blood to flick through the latest goings-on in the various events, even in ones I’m not familiar with. But I can’t help but be frustrated at the lack of interest towards athletes who have trained just as hard and gone through the same grueling process as the athletes in the able-bodied games.

It’s really difficult to convince people that the Paralympics are worth paying attention to and it’s not enough that such a tournament even exists, which is what people have tried to use as a legitimate argument to me in conversation. When Paralympians win a medal for your country, it’s the same as when an able-bodied Olympian wins a medal for your country. Motivations are the same and the achievement evokes the same emotion of accomplishments and success for the players. It should do the same for the nation too, but nonetheless it’s difficult to argue that this is the case. On the national level, the standards are completely two-sided.

People with disabilities are underrepresented in all aspects of life and sporting achievements are just another example of this. This doesn’t make it ok and it will take time to prove to people that the Paralympics are worth paying equal attention to for the sake of making New Zealand an inclusive and accepting society.

Earlier this week a woman wrote a letter to the editor of The Northland Age outlining the importance for her Te Hiku Ward to build a hydrotherapy pool in their community since her closest one wasn’t very close at all and the waiting list was months long.

She also mentioned how a number of people in her community have had to move to the bigger cities of Whangerei and Auckland in order to have easier access to more healthcare and wellness facilities.

I have to say that when I first read this, I felt a bit ashamed.

Living in my yuppie Auckland bubble where such facilities are at my fingertips, I’m unfortunately unaware of what it must be like to not have access to vital physical therapy equipment such as this.

Any health professional would tell you how beneficial hydrotherapy is for someone with a mobility issue or stroke victims.

Therefore, considering the necessity of this facility, having to move away from your community to have access to a wider variety of healthcare facilities would be one of the most disheartening decisions a person would ever have to make.

If this is the case in her specific community, there will definitely be other areas across the country where people who are stuck in this awful position have to make a similar decision.

The aim of Mrs Harold’s letter was to highlight the importance of having a hydrotherapy pool in the proposed Te Hiku Sports Hub’s Aquatic Centre.

I sincerely hope they, as well as other wards across the country, take her advice and build one.

This is not just for her sake but also for the sake of future generations who will rely heavily on facilities such as this for their health and wellbeing.

No one should have to leave his or her hometowns and communities in order to receive adequate healthcare.

It’s obvious that people with invisible disabilities are more discriminated against than those with visible disabilities. But like with every marginalised community, the situation is only spoken about when an incident occurs that warrants public attention, such as when a woman whose son has a brain injury was verbally abused because the accusers claimed that her son ‘doesn’t look disabled’.

At the moment my disability is completely visible, but before I became permanently wheelchair-bound my disability was essentially invisible. While I walked with a limp and often needed someone to hold my hand, when we would park in a disabled spot we would get those ‘should you be parking there’ looks. What such people don’t seem to understand is that I don’t have this disabled parking permit for nothing and CCS Disability Action don’t issue them in vein. One would assume that these are factors people consider before passing judgement on someone who exercises their right to park in a spot that is specifically reserved for them and those alike.

I get the intent of the people who accused her of unlawfully abusing these spaces – they want to make sure that they are kept free for those who genuinely need them. But the issue comes when these well-meaning observers don’t stop to check or think that she may actually be one of those who genuinely need them. Taking that precaution to see if they are entitled to park in that space is as easy as checking to see if their permit is displayed. That is literally all it takes to avoid unfairly humiliating someone in public and in front of their child.

Then there is the obvious absurdity of blaming someone for not being or looking ‘disabled enough’. Its difficult enough having to deal with the pressures of having a disability or caring for someone with a disability. Imagine then being put in the awful position of being forced to prove this to someone. If they tell this particular person that they have a disability-parking permit displayed, they are under no further obligation to explain why they have one. Frankly, it is no one’s business.

I think what this comes down to is a lack of compassion. Vilifying a mother who is simply taking care of her son is not the way any society is supposed to function. If someone parks in a disability parking spot and they don’t have a permit displayed then by all means, question them about it. But jumping to conclusions in such a way is incredibly disheartening and can have regressive consequences when it comes to the progress we’ve made so that people with disabilities no longer have to live on the margins of society.

This flag-changing debate is bound to come up over and over again until it is finally changed. I have always believed that we needed to change the flag as it represents a painful colonial history from which we are still suffering the consequences of. But I seem to remember PM John Key talking about how changing the flag wasn’t New Zealand’s most pressing issue at the moment, which was true. What confuses me the most is that this statement is more accurate now than it was before. So then, why the sudden concern?

Firstly, one would think that growing inequality would be a more important issue to tackle than changing the flag. In fact, the United Nations Human Rights council says that New Zealand has 155 issues to work through. This number was 64 in 2009. Although the flag-changing conversation started before this was announced, I find it hard to believe that our government was unaware of the fact that we have more problems now than we did before, especially since a difference of 91 after only 4 years is monstrous.

Secondly, after reading the opinion pieces from the NZ Herald, which are never particularly balanced anyway, it is evident that the conversation is somewhat superficial. This is expected given the nature of the context under which the question came back into the limelight after so long. Key has affirmed that he is a monarchist who is for a flag-change. But what about those of us, myself included, who seriously want to consider changing the constitution and finally becoming a republic? I can’t see that topic ever coming up. Instead, what I see is this whole debate eventually dwindling away until someone brings it up again however-many years down the line.

Like I said, I want to get rid of the Union Jack from our flag, but I also want that occasion to symbolise something more than a mere flag-change. When that happens it will have a deeper meaning regarding acknowledging and taking the final step in becoming our own country and our own people free from an imperial connection. This includes the possibility of becoming a republic. But that will be difficult to do when we have an increasing number of issues to work through together as a nation.

There is a photography exhibition going on at the moment at CCS Disability Action called ‘Do you think I’m Sexy?’ The topic is female sexuality and disability and the aim of it is to spark discussion about that very issue.

Female sexuality in general is a topic that is misrepresented and objectified a lot of the time due to the damaging portrayal of women in the media. We often don’t speak, have no opinion and the female body is primarily just a body that is there for the male gaze.

Therefore, you can imagine how the female body that has a disability is underrepresented than the able-bodied one in the media, which inevitably leads to misrepresentation and misconceptions in the real world.

The perceptions of both men and women with disabilities is typically that of a placid person who simply cruises through life and isn’t particularly self-aware. The reality is that the opposite is true. For women with physical disabilities in particular, becoming comfortable with a body that is massively different to the majority of people is crucial, especially with the prevalence of a particular standard of beauty, but can also be a painful and emotional journey.

With the widespread perception of women with disabilities being what it is, it makes this process somewhat more difficult. It’s quite hard to become comfortable in the skin that you’re in when the very topic of the disabled body is taboo, not to mention barely seen in the media. What it leads to is having to keep quiet for the sake of avoiding an uncomfortable and awkward conversation, therefore turning the whole situation into a non-issue.

Essentially it’s a form of objectification. Yes, it’s a different type, but its objectification nonetheless in the sense that we’re often looked at in a one-dimensional way.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/01/27/do-you-think-im-sexy/feed/1Income inequality for the disabled continueshttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/01/19/income-inequality-for-the-disabled-continues/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/01/19/income-inequality-for-the-disabled-continues/#commentsSat, 18 Jan 2014 18:15:25 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=39542
People with disabilities are the largest minorities in the world. We are also the most financially disadvantaged.

This has been made worse recently with the recent efforts to encourage people with disabilities to enter the workforce. It seems quite paradoxical that wanting to encourage this can have negative consequences. But as per usual, this is due to the methods by which the Ministry of Social Development in conjunction with health practitioners are doing so, proving that the end almost never justifies the means.

When someone with a disability are seeking the Supported Living Payment, health practitioners are being trained to write “medical certificates that are ambiguous and open the door for the ministry to cancel the Supported Living Payment”, which results in putting them onto Jobseeker Support, where the weekly amount is about $50 less. They are clearly not considering the day-to-day realities of people with disabilities.

Firstly, it’s important to tackle the stigma that people with disabilities on the benefit love being at the mercy of handouts, because this is what the change in practice implies. Then there’s the argument that working is better for your health than living life on the benefit. Um. Yea. We know. And agree. Obviously.

It’s amazing to me that people seriously think people with disabilities who are willing and physically and mentally able to work, don’t want to. This is absolutely untrue. The truth however, is that finding work is harder for us. Employers don’t want the added stress of having to provide for our extra needs. Not our fault. If the attitudes of employers changed, so will the number of people on the Supported Living Payment.

Secondly, we have more expenses on fundamental things such as transport. Given the unreliability of public transport, transport for people with disabilities who are unable to drive generally involves taxis, and we all know how expensive they are, even with the Total Mobility Scheme. Then there are GP and physiotherapist fees to name a couple. The money they get is not spent in vain.

There are other ways of helping people with disabilities enter the workforce that are much more effective and don’t further disadvantage the community. There are organisations built for that specific purpose. But it ultimately comes down to the one thing I talk about repeatedly, which is the lack of the disabled voice at the decision-making level. This is 99% of the problem.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/01/19/income-inequality-for-the-disabled-continues/feed/5Where are the rights of children with disabilities?https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/01/12/where-are-the-rights-of-children-with-disabilities/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2014/01/12/where-are-the-rights-of-children-with-disabilities/#commentsSat, 11 Jan 2014 19:13:22 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=39162

Once again, we’re facing a situation where the rights of the disabled are ignored and progress is slow to change the legislation on the issue.

Currently, parents who are in the dreadful position of being unable to care for their disabled child can place them in a residential care home. The thing is though, is that that’s it. The child can be living in a home indefinitely, possibly even the rest of their lives, which means being deprived of community or family life

Non-disabled children can only stay in a residential facility for a maximum of six months and they are assigned an advocate to protect their rights as well as regular reviews. Children with disabilities are given no such treatment. This makes them susceptible to neglect and abuse. This may be uncommon, but possible nonetheless and with the lack of reviews, where are the children expected to turn for protection? This cuts down to the core stigma that people with disabilities don’t have a voice. Even as an adult, I still have people asking my friends and family, “So what does she do?” while I’m right there and capable of answering that question myself. Apparently I don’t even have a name. The first step is to acknowledge that children with disabilities have just as many rights as children without, and one of those is the right to safety and a healthy family life.

Secondly, I can’t even imagine how difficult and heartbreaking it must be to make the decision to place your child in a home. This is why adequate resources and training need to be provided to such families from the beginning so they know how to best take care of their child. This will then prevent the likelihood of parents having to make such an awful decision in the long run. The increased availability of short-term respite care facilities is an example of such a resource, which is what the Vulnerable Children’s Bill is proposing. They are also proposing that if there is still no possibility of the child returning home to their parents, they can then be moved to the care of another family as opposed to remaining in a type of ‘limbo’ state, where they have no idea what their future holds – yet another right that children with disabilities deserve but currently don’t always have.

I’m not saying these children are not being properly taken care of in residential care homes. I think caregivers and support workers who have the skills necessary to take care of a person with high needs are one of the most underappreciated groups of people in our community. But what I am saying is that it is simply not good enough that children with disabilities are somewhat locked away from society and deprived of being part of the wider community because of some archaic legislation that was founded upon the out-dated ‘institutionalisation’ type mentality. As the lobby group CCS Disability Action says, “Professionals are no real substitute for a family”.

I realise that some people may say I’ve hopped on the ‘Pope Francis Bandwagon’ but how awesome is he?

I’m not Catholic, or even Christian, nor do I intend to be anytime soon but that’s not exactly a prerequisite of being increasingly interested in everything he has to say, which describes me lately.

He first grabbed my attention when he removed the elaborate attire from his clothing, then he denounced the religious response to the Gay Rights Movement, then he criticised capitalism and the impact it has on the majority of the world’s population.

Finally a leader who is acknowledging that looking out for all humankind should be our priorities rather than our own self-interests. Finally a religious leader who is saying that being self-serving at the expense of other human beings is a bigger abomination than someone’s personal life decisions. And these are the beliefs of most religious people in this world, which is why its so great to see him represent the opinions of the majority.

Religion aside, I hope that the widespread approval of the Pope’s message about a social and political shift leads to real change for 2014, especially for New Zealand’s very important election year.

I feel like I’m always talking about equal access – how there’s not enough, how our requests to improve it fall on deaf ears and the impact it has on our everyday experiences. But access is the key thing that holds people with disabilities back in our efforts to tackle the marginalisation that comes with unequal access. This includes stigmatisation in the workforce and the belief that ‘well, people with disabilities don’t really go out anyway so there’s no point’, which is an argument that infuriates me.

What’s the point in going out and getting your hopes up about something only to be let down by a flight of stairs, or the absence of a simple ramp? Obviously, we would go out more if this fear wasn’t so prominent in our minds and this is especially the case during the summer months. Outdoor feasting, beaches and bushwalks is what makes the ideal kiwi summer and it’s exactly what everyone looks forward too.

For someone in an electric wheelchair, sand is a complete write-off. Using a manual chair is doable but this requires one or two extra people, which involve throwing one’s independence out the window. The only other way is if there’s a special chair available that can handle sand, which I’ve only ever seen once. And it wasn’t in New Zealand. Of course, owning one is very expensive so its unlikely that many people have one.

Bushwalking is a hit-and-miss situation. The other day I was flicking through one of those free ‘NZ Walks’ calendars and before I could get excited about putting some of them on my list of things to do this summer, that question of accessibility crossed my mind.

To live in one of the most scenic countries in the world and for a significant portion of the population and tourists to be deprived of the opportunity to appreciate it is disheartening.

To be fair, there is a list online of accessible walks across the country that are categorised for people who have limited mobility and no mobility at all. But again this goes back to the fact that options for free recreational activities are limited and this shouldn’t still be the case.

I understand that change doesn’t happen overnight, but it doesn’t have to be so slow either. At what point do we admit that New Zealand should be open to everyone, regardless of ability? I shouldn’t have to hold myself back from having the quintessential New Zealand summer experience on the off chance that I’ll have to turn around and go home halfway through, especially if it turns out that the place is wheelchair friendly but is not advertised as being so, which is an even more disappointing missed opportunity.

Like I said, exclusion and lack of access is something that moulds how someone with a disability lives their life. It shouldn’t be the case that one aspect of my being has the ability to dictate my lifestyle, especially if it’s beyond my own control.

I’ve recently returned to New Zealand from going on the trip of a lifetime. Conquering the steep streets of San Francisco, driving my wheelchair on the road in Barbados because its safer than the footpath and getting swept in the pedestrian stampedes of New York City are no easy tasks. However, all three experiences gave me a greater appreciation of New Zealand. Of course, I have and always will love these beautiful lands of ours, but I now have a deeper understanding of how far we’ve come, how far we still have to go and feeling hopeful that we’re headed in the right direction in creating a fairer and totally inclusive society for all.

This was until I came home to the heart breaking news that we’re in the process of taking a step backwards in this regard. The Canterbury Earthquake Royal Commission released a report that basically said that cost-effectiveness is more important than wheelchair access. Section 112 of the Building Act 2004 currently states that all buildings being renovated or altered after this date have to comply with regulation regarding disability access and means of escape in the event of an emergency. The Commission suggested that this particular section should be amended because many building owners would not be able to afford the whopping 1.3% extra it would cost to make their buildings disabled friendly while they’re in the process of strengthening them. And, surprise surprise, this lovely, progressive, “lets move forward together” government of ours is considering this recommendation.

I can’t believe I have to point out how detrimental and regressive this is. Job opportunities will be further limited than what they already are, and if an employee in a wheelchair is lucky enough to find employment in one of these buildings, would they not want to escape in the event of an emergency?

This world just said goodbye to the greatest leader of our generation. Nelson Mandela showed us that any adversity could be overcome so long as we persist and hold our heads up high. His only mission was inclusion, acceptance and fairness and this is the only mission of the differently-abled community. What I’m seeing in this situation is a total disregard for the disabled voice, as I highly doubt anyone from this particular community of who this act directly affects was consulted, and if they were then they clearly weren’t taken very seriously.

Now, I’m not saying that this is comparable to the brutal regime of Apartheid. Obviously! But what I am saying is that as a nation and as a world, we still have a very long way to go. In all three places I recently travelled to, people are constantly struggling to have the disabled voice heard at the legislative level and I would even go so far as to say that it is one of the most ignored. If we genuinely and sincerely want to continue the great Madiba’s legacy as we so proudly claim to, this has to change.

I’m not entirely sure what I can say about the Roast Busters that probably hasn’t already been said. But I feel inclined to get all my anger and sadness off my chest.

This situation has got under my skin to the point where every time I think about it, I feel sick to my stomach. Thats not just because it happened and that there are people out there, in our very community who have it in their heads that this is ok, but because it was allowed to continue by people who are supposed to protect us. It says something when mainstream journalists do a better job at reporting the facts of whats going on in our country than the police do at protecting the people. It also says something when young girls don’t even bother approaching them.

Me and my naivety never thought that corruption to this degree existed in our country, but I’ve been proven wrong. Thankfully, I’ve never been in a situation where I’ve needed to call on the police. Being in a wheelchair though, my safety is often compromised, I would argue more so than an able-bodied person. But I always felt safe in the knowledge that they will be there for me should I need them. I hope this sense of safety can return one day soon because its mentalities and behaviour such as this that perpetuates the male-dominated culture in various aspects of our society, including the work force. And I can’t even believe that this fact needs to be said in an idiot-proof way for people to actually understand that we’re stuck in a time warp when it comes to the safety of young women.

In saying that though, I hope this counts as proof that the feminism movement has a long way to go. Especially when there are people on Radio Live! trying to convey the message to the masses that victim blaming is the way to go. Unlike old and out-of-touch men like them, these kids were quite young, which is all the more disturbing since they have gone through the school system recently. Clearly there needs to be serious conversations in the classrooms about consent. From memory, I think we got that talk once, maybe twice. It seems like this isn’t enough, especially when we’re trying to get rid of a long-standing patriarchal mentality that is almost centred on double standards between men and women when it comes to ‘appropriate behaviour’.

One thing that gives me hope is the backlash and horrified response towards police inaction. They will never stop people from speaking the truth, no matter how much they try. However I have to say its just ridiculous that its taken a horrific incident such as this for New Zealanders to open their eyes to the fact that misogyny is out of control in this country and that people are starting to lose faith in the patriarchal system, which needed to go a long time ago anyway.

In any case, I don’t want to have to watch my back every time I leave the house and I don’t want to be ashamed of wanting to have a good time when I go out. I don’t think I’m asking for much and I can’t believe that we have to demand the right to be safe.

Yesterday morning I decided to have a quick flick through the Herald. (yes, I know, mistake #1) and on the front page I saw a picture of Len Brown and a small headline reading ‘Luigi Wewege leaves New Zealand’, or something to that general effect.

I didn’t look twice at the headline, which is probably why I can’t remember the exact wording of it, nor did I read the article. I simply pushed it aside and carried on with my morning coffee.

I’ve disagreed with the way the media has covered this story right from the beginning. I’m a strong believer in respecting people’s privacy and this situation affects his family and no one else. I can only imagine what his wife and children must have been going through as it is, without the rest of us thinking that we have some sort of right to stick our noses into their private life. It has absolutely nothing to do with the general public.

I would kind of understand if Brown ran his campaign from the righteous angle – taking away the rights of others, using the ‘family man’ image to prove his legitimacy as a mayor and claiming to be the most ‘morally’ perfect person in Auckland. He never did that though and obviously I’m not endorsing his actions but I’m not entirely sure where this strange sense of betrayal comes from.

If the public are really that desperate to criticise him, criticise his politics. And please try not to be one of those that loved him and voted for him but now that this news has come out you think he’s a terrible mayor. He fell short politically before re-elected and I would rather discuss that instead of his irrelevant private life.

As a person with a disability I was incredibly disheartened to hear about the ridiculous policy that allows KFC to sack someone on the basis of his or her disability. It’s a clear reminder of the structural discrimination that is in full swing in our society and how far we still have to go to eradicate it.

It’s not just ability that employers discriminate on the basis of, but also ethnicity and gender. How many times have we heard stories of someone being denied a job interview because they had an Asian name, and then once they submit the exact same CV with an English name it has the opposite effect?

I’m really glad that Tanya got her job back. Its proof of the things we, as a society can get done and how far we can go if we band together for the betterment of our future. But the fact remains that initially, this never should have even happened. The disabled community is still one of the most financially disadvantaged, and there’s a reason for that. Some, not all, but some employers just don’t want to deal with the extra drama that goes alongside hiring someone with extra needs, not even if they bring a unique and valuable perspective to the table. It is hard enough finding decent employment these days. Imagine how much harder it is when you roll yourself into a job interview and the initial reaction of the employer is that of dread. It’s a hard reaction to ignore, especially when you’re already nervous. Your full time employment opportunities are even further diminished.

The other reason is that disability rights are not something on everyone’s radar. I really hope that the actions taken by KFC are the catalyst we need for progressive change in the workplace.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/10/13/discrimination-in-the-workplace/feed/4When your taxes are spent in the right placeshttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/22/when-your-taxes-are-spent-in-the-right-places/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/22/when-your-taxes-are-spent-in-the-right-places/#commentsSat, 21 Sep 2013 18:34:39 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=32196It is really surprising how many people I come across who harp on about how their hard earned taxes are going to lazy people on the benefit and if they wanted the money they can earn it. This statement is so factually incorrect that I can’t even begin to point out its flaws.

I can however tell you where at least some of your taxpayer money is going. Since I was diagnosed in 2003 my disability related expenses have been next to nothing. I have never had to fork out ridiculous amounts of dollars to pay for housing modifications, every day equipment, electric wheelchairs or school-related necessities to date. Recently I got a new power chair that is worth approximately $10k. Add all of these expenses up and you will get a six-digit figure, all paid for by the government so that I can have the best opportunities at life, given that this is an expense that most families including my own simply cannot afford. Not having this equipment means not standing a chance.

Could it be better? Sure. Of course there is always room for improvement. For example, when it comes to the time it takes to be seen by someone because there is simply not enough occupational therapists, physiotherapists and resources to cater to every single person’s needs is something to be desired. But this will be difficult to improve on when we constantly have to deal with budget cuts in the health sector, effectively meaning that the quality and amount of service given to people with disabilities has to be compromised.

These compromises are made for the sake of the pockets of people who already have enough money and resources to live comfortably for the rest of their lives without ever suffering the consequences of such compromises. This is not to say that people in the higher income bracket don’t have disabilities. Obviously. But it’s easier for them to pay the difference. Then of course higher decile schools and wealthier areas have more money that gets poured into that specific community, thus widening the gap. My point is that there needs to be equal access to resources no matter what your background is and this is the whole point of public schooling and healthcare systems.

To say that you are anti-tax is to say that you don’t believe in equal opportunities for all, no matter their situation.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/22/when-your-taxes-are-spent-in-the-right-places/feed/21Lines are still blurred when it comes to disabilityhttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/08/lines-are-still-blurred-when-it-comes-to-disability/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/08/lines-are-still-blurred-when-it-comes-to-disability/#commentsSat, 07 Sep 2013 19:30:11 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=30530

Everyone saw the ‘Defined Lines’ parody that blew up this week. I thought it was brilliant and I loved everything about it.

The lyrics told everyone that women actually want to be treated like human beings. Then there was the video, which was probably the best part about it. That role reversal showed just to what extent women are treated as if they’re not even human in most music videos out there.

But then the video got taken down and shit officially got real. What was meant to be an addition to the huge number of Blurred Lines parodies in the internets became the nail in the coffin for people who still want to maintain that the feminist movement is no longer necessary.

Of course we’re not all equal. We shouldn’t have to prove that to anyone. But the fact that it got taken down shows that no one likes it when you criticize the dominant discourse.

In terms of the content of the video though, the whole message was that we have a voice and we have something to say. We’re not just there for show. Don’t treat us like we’re there but not there at the same time.

This is the case for people of the disabled community. I hardly see people like me in the media and it’s annoying that we seem to not be included in this movement to make the media diverse and inclusive of all communities.

The only show I can think of that includes someone with a disability being ‘normal’ is Walter Jr from Breaking Bad (keeping in mind there could be more shows that I don’t know about). Artie Abrams from Glee does not count. Why? Because unlike the actor that portrays Walt Jr, he does not have a disability in real life. The inauthenticity of that is so transparent and any high schooler living with a disability can see that, making it all the more non-relatable.

Much like women in music videos who are only wanted if they are there purely as part of the decor, people with disabilities are not there at all. Just like how young girls need to see positive representations of people they can identify with in the media, young people living with disabilities need to see themselves in the media too to promote a positive self-image and the fact that there is nothing ‘wrong’ with them.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/09/08/lines-are-still-blurred-when-it-comes-to-disability/feed/6Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill as brutal to human rights as GCSBhttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/08/25/public-health-and-disability-amendment-bill-as-brutal-to-human-rights-as-gcsb/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/08/25/public-health-and-disability-amendment-bill-as-brutal-to-human-rights-as-gcsb/#commentsSat, 24 Aug 2013 18:15:54 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=28472
Back in May the Public Health and Disability Amendment Bill was passed that allowed people to get paid for caring for family members with disabilities. This seems like a good idea and it would be if a few things were changed around. This funding does not include spouses or parents, but also we’re not allowed to contest anything in court.

I know this bill was passed a while ago but I’m bringing it up now because in light of the GCSB protests being ignored, it seems like our democratic rights are being ignored.

One of the defining aspects of a democracy is about having the ability to make your grievances and concerns voiced in the knowledge that you will be respectfully listened to. This applies to speaking out against bills that have direct implications on the day-to-day lives of all Kiwis, and when it comes to people that are caring for family members with disabilities, this has a significant impact on their lives.

Parents and spouses often have to take the most time off work to care for their adult child or spouse with disabilities, whether its taking days off, arriving later or finishing earlier due to various reasons. Obviously this is going to impact on their wage, although it shouldn’t, which should make them the ones who are most eligible for funding. Also, only those with ‘severe disabilities’ will get the funding. However, it’s hard to clarify what counts as ‘severe’ and who decides what is ‘severe’ and what isn’t.

Disability advocates say that they will have a hard time trusting the current government after this Bill was quickly passed without allowing for any public input and I couldn’t agree more. The passing of the GCSB Amendment Bill despite widespread opposition will make this even harder, if not impossible.

It’s a known fact that children see things differently to adults. We often admire the way they see things in such simplistic, logical and sometimes hilarious ways. It could be a developmental thing, or just their lack of experience but I think we can all learn a thing or two about life or the world just by seeing how the children of our world sees it.

Ok, sometimes their thinking is a bit too simplistic in which case we explain the reality of the situation to them. Children tend to see things in quite an egocentric way, and I mean that in the nicest way possible. They haven’t yet grasped the idea that other people live different lifestyles to them. So from that perspective, it’s always fascinating to see how they react to the wheelchair and realizing that there is such a thing as ‘difference’. Some responses are just too cute. For example, ‘you should take Panadol because that’s what we have to do when we’re sore’ or ‘my cousin broke their leg but they’re walking now so why cant you have an operation too?’

Some think it’s the coolest invention ever, some even said I was lucky because I didn’t have to walk long distances. Some want to go for a ride on my lap and make car engine noises and others jump on the back and ask me to zoom as fast as possible down a hill (don’t worry, I’ll never do that). But the most fascinating thing I find is the way their whole behaviour changes as soon as they see the chair, even those really energetic ones. They’re so intrigued with the whole mechanism because for most of them they’ve never seen such a thing before. They constantly ask questions like ‘why are you in that?’ or ‘how fast does it go?’

I love their openness and honesty. They’re at that awesome stage when they say whatever they want because they don’t know what’s appropriate and what’s not. But the thing is that I don’t even find it offensive when people ask questions, in fact I encourage it. Some adults are reluctant to ask because they think I would get offended, which I understand, but I would rather have you ask me whatever you want to know in order to open your understanding of disabled life.

The funniest thing is catching adults staring at the chair, and then they see that I’m looking at them, and they quickly look at the wall, expecting me to believe that they were just staring at the bare wall for the past five minutes. I don’t mind if it’s a passer-byer in public and they just have a glance to see what its all about. But sometimes as social events people just gawk. Often I even notice their children want to talk to me but they stop them from doing so, which is ultimately stopping them from learning. This could possibly be because they think it’s too rude to ask me about it. I can understand why they feel like they need to keep their distance for fear of making us feel like a charity case or that they’re getting too personal but if you approach us the right way and don’t ask awkward or extremely personal questions we won’t have that problem. Also most of it comes down to acknowledging that I am a whole person and the disability is only one aspect of our being.

Other people may have a different opinion about this but personally, I would much prefer having an honest conversation rather than being stared at. It’s a way of educating the public about how life is for us. As we grow older we lose those innocent qualities that all children hold, the ones where you can ask an innocent question without the other person thinking you have an evil agenda. Curiosity isn’t and never was a bad thing. Not one person in history knows every last thing there is to know about the world. Adults are constantly learning just as children are and when it comes to how we learn and the way we see things, I think in some cases we can all afford to unleash our inner child.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/08/11/just-ask/feed/1Why you shouldn’t make Assumptions. Everhttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/07/22/why-you-shouldnt-make-assumptions-ever/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/07/22/why-you-shouldnt-make-assumptions-ever/#commentsSun, 21 Jul 2013 19:35:02 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=23343In light of this gloomy winter weather I’m feeling a little bit nostalgic. So I’m going to talk about an interesting experience I had last summer in regard to wheelchair-accessible accommodation when I was holidaying in Paihia with my family.

This trip was amazing. Paihia has got to be one of the most beautiful places on earth, reminding me of how I love this country of ours. Wheelchair accessibility in Paihia is flawless, which I was impressed with considering it is a historic town, and the people are super friendly. From a wheelchair-using point of view, I only have one complaint and even though this complaint was a pretty major one, I can usually write a list of things that are not up to scratch from a wheelchair’s perspective when I go on holiday. And considering this town is a tourist town I would expect it to be perfect.

This quite-major mishap was the accommodation situation. A couple of weeks before leaving my mum did her appropriate research and booked a room that was wheelchair friendly, reasonably priced and in a central location. So, confident that we had a place to rest as soon as we arrived after a 4-5 hour drive we hopped in the car and got on the road.

Once we finally got there, we went straight to the hotel. We got given the key to our room and when we got there, there was a step to get into the bathroom of the “wheelchair accessible room”. After speaking with the manager on duty at the time, who was incredibly rude and didn’t even understand what the big problem was, we cancelled our booking and started looking for another hotel. The manager of the second hotel also said they had an accessible room and when we had a look at it, it was the same situation – a big step to get into the bathroom. Third time lucky, however. That one was perfect.

I can easily say that this could be purely due to ignorance and people assuming that you can just lift the wheelchair over the step. On a side note, this would be possible if I had a manual wheelchair, but I don’t, and electric chairs are impossible to lift. But this is more than just an ignorant assumption. The council approves this and that is why they can have these ridiculous rooms deemed ‘legally wheelchair accessible’. I can’t even begin to describe how shocked I was at this. How can the room be wheelchair friendly, if I can’t even get into the bathroom? I don’t understand. And this issue isn’t exclusive to Northland; the same thing happened to me in Taupo last year.

This proves my theory that in order for something to be ‘wheelchair friendly’, it needs to be approved by someone who is in a wheelchair. There is no way a person who is actually in a wheelchair, or has been in the past and knows exactly what provisions need to be in place, approved that stupidity. Any able-bodied person can say that its ok but at the end of the day, that’s a mere assumption and assumptions are never a guaranteed truth. It’s also incredibly patronising. Can I not speak for myself on the matter? And if it’s not up to standard, do you expect me to just deal with it at the expense of my safety just so you can earn a buck? But all that aside, shouldn’t it be obvious? Able-bodied or not, if the first thing that comes to your mind when thinking about wheelchair-accessibility is “a big step”, you really need to check yourself.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/07/22/why-you-shouldnt-make-assumptions-ever/feed/3Support Worker Wages are Ridiculoushttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/07/07/support-worker-wages-are-ridiculous/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/07/07/support-worker-wages-are-ridiculous/#commentsSat, 06 Jul 2013 20:17:29 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=21503
There is no doubt that support workers in the healthcare sector are underpaid and undervalued. And considering the importance of the work they do, it makes absolutely no sense to me.

Carer support workers who work for Ministry of Health contracted, taxpayer funded, healthcare-providing companies travel from home to home and assist those with disabilities, injuries or the elderly with their day-to-day activities. This not only improves the quality of life for said people, but for their families too, especially for those such as myself living at home with their parents as their primary caregivers. Then of course there is the growing number of people with disabilities who prefer to have the independence of flatting.

This quality of life would be impossible if it weren’t for the support workers whose job is centred purely on making sure a group of often forgotten people are able to live the best possible life they can under their circumstances.

In light of recent events surrounding the ridiculous wage for age-care support workers, I wanted to bring attention to the system of pay other support workers who work in the community are subject to, because not only are they paid next to nothing, the system of pay is beyond unreasonable.

Basically, their hours have to be signed off by their clients and they get paid for how many hours they worked. While that makes complete sense, it’s not exactly a fair pay system. Any hospitalisation, which of course medical issues make us more susceptible to, means workers can’t get paid for that time. And since these medical issues are the reasons we need this service in the first place, it makes this system all the more disheartening.

To fully encompass how damaging this is to their livelihoods, we have to take into account the situation of the majority of these workers, besides the obvious structural sexism at play here since most of them are women. I have 3 support workers and all 3 of them are single mothers with rent to pay and mouths to feed. How exactly are they supposed to do this if they are denied their pay for reasons outside of human control?

When I speak to my support workers, they talk about how the somewhat flexible nature of their work allows them to be with their children before and after school, which is every parent’s right. But as well as this, they talk about how much they love their job and the importance and value they place on the work that they do. This is the common narrative of all healthcare workers, including nurses and caregivers in rest homes.

My personal conclusion from this overall situation is that it’s a case of corporations taking advantage of society’s most vulnerable. Knowing that those with disabilities and the elderly cannot live a good quality of life without this service coupled with the fact that there are people whose personal situations makes this arrangement a convenient one for their preferred lifestyle makes it easy to rip them off. This makes it easy to ensure they are denied a decent wage with a reasonable pay system, and it disgusts me.

Auckland Public Transport has a pretty bad reputation – possibly the worst in the country. And having dealt with it for almost three years now, I get it. Buses not arriving on time, reckless driving, refusing to let people on when they’re a split second late – the list continues

Before I dedicate a whole post to inconsiderate bus drivers, I want to mention that a lot of them are ok. They’re respectful and know what they need to do. But when you get dealt a shitty bus-driver, it really can spoil your day, especially when you’re in a wheelchair and need a tad bit more assistance.

Three things are required of a bus driver from wheelchair-bound passengers – to lower the bus, to unfold the ramp and to lift the seat in the 4-seated area. Some do this happily, others just do what they need to do but some are clear in showing me through the look on their face how much inconvenience I’m causing them.

I kind of get their reluctance. Goodness knows how many people walk over that little lever-thing (this is the scientific term for it by the way) everyday and how unhygienic it must be, especially for the amount they get paid to do that, which really is a useless excuse for a wage. No one really ‘wants’ to do that and I can empathise with that. But how exactly is this my fault? Seriously, all I want to do is get to and from uni. Why do you have to look at me like I’m the one who designed the buses for the sole purpose of inflicting this nightmare on you? Because if I had my way, the system would be completely different.

Everyone knows of that time when the driver sped off while an elderly person or a parent with a pram wasn’t yet seated. One time I had a driver who wouldn’t let me on the bus because I would be a burden on her. Another said it’s not their job to get up and help and that I’m supposed to have someone with me. Then of course there was that story recently where the train took off while a lady in a wheelchair was only halfway off. Yea. I’ll just let that sink in. Also, how can such inconsiderate people get away with such disrespectful behaviour?

That’s not even half the story though. When you e-mail MAXX to complain, you’ll be lucky to even get a response, not that the response in even constructive in any way. Oh, you’re sorry? Well, that just solves everything.

Some drivers are so friendly. They’re chatty, smiley and crack jokes. It’s refreshing but I’m not going to demand that every single bus driver have a good sense of humour and a permanent grin on their face. I’m not expecting us to become best friends, especially in the ridiculous hours of a Monday morning when no one should be allowed to talk.

All I want is respect and I think this is what this whole thing boils down to. Respect is reciprocal and completely necessary for the healthy functioning of society. Bus drivers across the country deserve a decent wage for transporting 98% of the city to their destination. And people who use public transport or any service deserve to have their needs catered to so they don’t have to worry about being made to feel like a ‘burden’.

I’m sick of everyone complaining that New Zealand is becoming too ‘PC’.

These days it seems as if anyone who calls someone out on being rude, they are criticised for being too PC or unable to take a joke. Well, I’m here to inform everyone that I actually can take a joke. I even make a few jokes of my own from time to time. But there is a difference between making a joke and being disrespectful, offensive and derogatory.

Anyway, where does that argument come from? How can you be ‘too’ politically correct? What does it even mean to be ‘politically correct’ and why / how is this a bad thing? This is a serious question. I’m genuinely trying to understand the dynamics of this oh-so-tolerant society of ours.

From what I can gather from recent events, being offended by racist cartoons is too politically correct and therefore a bad thing.

So wait, does that mean that being racist is a good thing? Does that mean that we can go back to the days of ‘curry-muncher’ and ‘coconut’ because it’s just a joke?

Ok, that makes sense. It really doesn’t matter that the people for whom these terms are referred to associate these words with inferiority, marginalisation and being spoken to in a patronising and sub-human way. Why did these words go out of fashion in the first place? Why don’t we just go back to how it was 50 years ago? Personally, I have no problem being branded a curry-munching retarded woman who can’t leave my home.

During the 2012 Euro Cup in Poland a group of hooligans were monkey-chanting the Dutch squad. And then of course Eddie McGuire said that the Aboriginal AFL player Adam Goodes would be a good person to promote King Kong. Is this meant to be a joke? Am I meant to laugh at these two incidences knowing the history behind the association between indigenous populations and monkeys? If I don’t find it funny, does that mean I’m too serious and too PC?

All I can gather is that ‘political correctness’ is the same as humanism. It’s about being respectful towards all people. I don’t find racial profiling a joke, or any type of profiling or stereotyping for that matter. And because it’s about the fundamental core of being human, there is no way it can be subjective either so Mr Key, your argument is invalid.

To say that this Marlborough Express cartoon is a ‘joke’ is to say that it’s perfectly acceptable to assume that all Maori and Pasifika parents are scam artists who only care about booze, smokes and pokies and couldn’t care less about their children. Caring for others, especially your young is a fundamental instinct of all animals including humans. So when you say Maori and Pasifika don’t care about their young, what exactly are you implying?

Call me the Fun Police if you wish but how exactly am I supposed to laugh at that? Am I being too PC by saying that Maori and Pasifika are in fact, human?

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/06/09/political-correctness-vs-humanism/feed/20What took so long?https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/05/26/what-took-so-long/
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/05/26/what-took-so-long/#commentsSat, 25 May 2013 20:09:06 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=14461Why does it take a tragedy to occur for people to realise that actually, things are pretty crap and maybe it’s about time we change them?

I was thinking this on the 25th of February of this year when a young woman in an electric wheelchair got stuck while trying to cross the railway crossing in Morningside. The wheelchair was struck by the train with her still strapped to it, dragging her 5 metres until the train finally stopped, leaving her severely injured and her wheelchair destroyed. It also takes a tremendous amount of courage to put your life at risk in the way two passer-byers did to save the life of the victim, one of who landed a minor injury themselves.

This event naturally sent shivers down my spine and made me sick to my stomach because I’m also in an electric wheelchair and that easily could have been me.

Similar to the ‘well, what was she wearing?’ argument that gets made every time a woman is raped, people were asking ‘well, what was she doing crossing the tracks in the most dangerous way possible?’ argument. Well, she obviously just wanted to put her life at risk by crossing one of the most dangerous crossings in the city, resulting in a two-month hospital admission.

I’m kidding. Clearly, there was no other way for her to get across and had there been, she wouldn’t have had to result in crossing in the dangerous way that she attempted.

2 weeks ago KiwiRail finally claimed responsibility and offered a payout to the victim and her family after almost 3 whole months.

That brings me back to my initial question. Lobbyists had been trying to get railway crossings improved for the past 10 years with little or no result, meaning this tragedy was avoidable as it almost always is. Not only this, but in late 2010 Auckland Transport issued a draft report that identified the most urgent crossings in Auckland and they would begin investigating the matter after 16 months.

Clearly, this 16-month wait was far too long and had this incident not occurred I’m sceptical as to how efficient they would have been in following through with this investigation.

I know these improvements are expensive but I really could not care less about that, nor do I care about who is liable or who is going to pay for these improvements or its removal.

At the end of the day it’s about the safety of all New Zealanders and the fact that it took them so long to make any constructive decisions makes me question whether their primary concern really is the safety of all New Zealanders. And by that I’m not just referring to the disabled community. I’m also talking about parents with prams, the elderly and anyone else who can’t just look both ways and dash over the railway crossing within a matter of seconds.

Nothing makes a person with a disability release their inner-Sheldon more than someone stealing our disability parking space. And every single New Zealander realises this now if they’d paid any attention to the news lately.

To put this story in a nutshell, a Facebook page was established and those with disabilities, or a brain, were encouraged to take photos of those who abused Mobility Parking Spaces and upload them onto this page. The intention was to discourage able-bodied motorists from stealing those prime parking spots from people who actually need them.

When I first heard about this page, I thought it was genius. This type of naming-and-shaming is a much bolder move than my personal tactic, which is to emotionally type passive-aggressive, Taylor Swift-esque Facebook statuses.

The amount of times people have stolen my spot is quite disgusting. The fact that people do this is not even the point. It’s the excuses they come up with to justify why they seem to think this type of selfishness is ok. My personal favourite that I’ve heard is “Oh, I’m disabled for the day”. To this person I would like to say, be careful what you wish for.

In saying this, I should give a message to those who think this is perfectly fine.
‘Oh, but I have the flu’ – not an excuse.
‘I’m only going to be a few minutes’ – not an excuse.
‘There’s another disability park they can use’ – no
‘There are no disabled people here and if they come, I’ll move’ – definitely not.
Oh, and your fake limp isn’t fooling anyone, either.

The important thing to note here is that the naming-and-shaming is actually working. Less able-bodied people have been parking in Mobility Parking spaces. While I was excited that this issue was making news, I was also questioning why it took an action such as this for people to actually change their parking habits. The parking fine isn’t enough. What’s slowing this offense down is the act of having his or her name and sometimes picture, put on a public forum for everyone to see.

That’s what I’m most annoyed about. While its a nice feeling having them ‘put to justice’, which is actually the whole point of a parking fine, it’s frustrating to me that they’re changing for the sake of their own reputation and not because it’s morally the right thing to do. Would the Lamborghini man have apologized if a picture of his car hadn’t made the front page of the Herald? If his main concern was the paint on his door, I find it hard to believe. I’ve always taken issue with those who guilt trip people into doing the right thing instead of explaining the principle behind it. But then again, when it comes to taking a park that is specifically set-aside for some one who legitimately needs it, it shouldn’t need explaining and this Facebook page shouldn’t have to exist.

If I had to give my opinion about whether this page is a good idea or not, I would say it’s a case of ‘desperate times calls for desperate measures’. If it has taken an act as extreme as this for people to come to their senses, then so be it. I just wish it didn’t take public humiliation for change to occur.

]]>https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/05/12/youre-in-my-spot/feed/6About Latifa Daudhttps://thedailyblog.co.nz/2013/05/01/about-latifa-daud/
Tue, 30 Apr 2013 21:05:25 +0000http://thedailyblog.co.nz/?p=10511Latifa Daud is currently a student at the University of Auckland who has been permanently wheelchair-bound for the past 6 years.

She has no formal credentials as yet, except for seeing the world from a unique stand-(or should I say ‘sit’)-point on a daily basis.

As a result, this has caused her to hold strong opinions about the structure of society, as well as the negative connotations held by many regarding ordinary, everyday people who just happen to be differently-abled.